On Wed, 17 May 2006, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> Daniel Rall wrote:
> > These APIs seems ideal for unit tests. Dan, do you already have some,
> > or shall I put some tests together?
> I was trying to push it through python so i could write some tests (I
> have a c file i'm using).
Let me know when the API stabilizes enough to write some tests, and
I'll do that.
> > How about SVN_MERGE_RANGE_SINGLE_REV (or SVN_MERGE_RANGE_ONE_REV or
> > SVN_MERGE_RANGE_REV) and SVN_MERGE_RANGE_SPAN as alternate names?
> Sure, whatever.
This seems to have an impact on the naming of the members in the
svn_merge_info_t struct. Do you care if I change those, too?
> > Long line here which could be wrapped. Error message text should have
> > _() markup for L10N.
I've made one change along these lines (r19719), but on IRC yesterday
you indicated that you were removing the peg revs, so I didn't update
all the messages to avoid excessive merge conflicts.
> >> *revision = result;
> >> *input = endptr;
> >> return SVN_NO_ERROR;
> >> }
> >> +/* pathname -> PATHNAME@REVISION */
> > Why is PATHNAME@REVISION capitalized in the doc string?
> Because it is part of the grammar, and this is pretty much the standard
> way grammars are written in text (tokens are capitalized) I have not
> commented them more than the grammar for the moment.
> Should it
Was there something else you wanted to add?
Received on Fri May 19 00:11:33 2006
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored