plundblad@google.com (Peter Lundblad) writes:
> Yeah, including the docstrings in the public headers if I recall correctly.
Well, that does make less work for the reader -- you always only have
to jump one reference level away, instead of N. (But I agree, it's
not really worth it in the long run.)
>> But how does it introduce code duplication? I agree the work wasn't
>> needed, but I think it was harmless...
>
> In the trivial case the code duplication is obviously also trivial, but
> sometimes compat wrappers aren't that trivial. Compat wrappers are one of the
> areas we really undertest, so a cut-and-paste error here may well go into
> a release undetected.
>
> The problem is that you set precedence by doing this in some
> places. People who look on existing code will
> continue this code churny activity and that's bad for
> maintainability.
That's a good point.
> That's why I'd rather like to see the changes
> to preexisting compat wrappers that were introduced on
> the sparse-directories branch to go away again.
That shouldn't be too hard, I'll take a look at the diff and see if I
can make a reversal this weekend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Mar 22 22:12:20 2007