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

Re: [PATCH] svn_wc_ventry(_ex) to eliminate heavily repeated code

From: Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev_at_farside.org.uk>
Date: 2007-03-19 22:22:16 CET

On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 10:19:09PM +0100, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> On 3/17/07, Malcolm Rowe <malcolm-svn-dev@farside.org.uk> wrote:
> >I like this approach, although I wonder whether it's appropriate to
> >consolidate the existing error messages into one "%s is not under version
> >control" messages?
> >
> Ok. I did that.
> As far as the first remark is concerned, I'm looking back at the
> adjusted patch and I'm wondering: What *is* the difference between 'No
> entry found' and "'%s' is unversioned"? Some errors have the 'no entry
> found' (which is also a different result code!) but I can't for the
> life of me figure out why we would have different result codes for
> these situations, especially because they're detected by the same
> condition...
> Anybody any ideas?

Is the first perhaps intended for situations where we believe the entry
_should_ have been found?


  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Mon Mar 19 22:22:30 2007

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.