[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r20033 - in branches/merge-tracking/subversion: include libsvn_repos svnserve

From: Daniel Rall <dlr_at_collab.net>
Date: 2006-06-13 00:11:43 CEST

On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Greg Hudson wrote:

> On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 12:13 -0700, Daniel Rall wrote:
> > Also, "rev" should be an optional parameter (the server defaults to
> > "youngest" -- the protocol doc might want to indicate that, too).
> > Does "rev" need to be placed in a tuple, or can it simply be preceded
> > by a question mark?
> With all due respect, there's nothing unique about this request; you
> can just look at how other commands handle similar constructs.

I did, but as this is my first foray into any serious svnserve/ra_svn
modifications, I appreciate the confirmation.

> ... On the second point, use the same optional-tuple syntax used by
> every other command, which puts the argument inside a tuple. That
> way the command can be extended to include more optional arguments.

That makes sense. The 'change-rev-prop' and 'log' commands don't
conform to this pattern, as their trailing optional elements aren't
enclosed in a tuple. Do they predate this pattern?

The 'get-dir' command has a trailing optional "list" type elment which
is not enclosed in a tuple. Is the tuple implicit for the "list" type

Lastly, some optional elements are enclosed in optional tuples (that
is, their enclosing tuple can end before the optional nested tuple
ever begins). Is this a pattern we want to continue?

Daniel Rall

  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Tue Jun 13 00:13:12 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.