On Mon, 01 Oct 2007, Eric Gillespie wrote:
> Daniel Rall <dlr@collab.net> writes:
>
> > I'm attaching some JavaHL changes which will need to go along with
> > this patch.
>
> Have you tested this? I'm reluctant to commit otherwise.
No, I did not apply your patch to my WC. All this trivial piggy-back
patch does is change the names of enum -- and pseudo-enum -- elements,
though. I can always redo it after you commit, if that's more
comfortable for ya.
...
> > > +svn_cl__conflict_baton_new(svn_cl__accept_t accept_which,
> > > + apr_hash_t *config,
> > > + const char *editor_cmd,
> > > + apr_pool_t *pool);
> >
> > Subversion uses the verbs "create" or "make" more often than the word
> > "new" in constructor function names.
>
> Ah, OK. I'll look around to see which is more common.
We use all three, but "create" outnumbers "make" by like 3-1, and
"new" is hardly used at all.
> > > +/* Return svn_cl__accept_t value corresponding to @ word.
> > > + * @since New in 1.5.
> > > + */
> > > +svn_cl__accept_t
> > > +svn_cl__accept_from_word(const char *word);
> >
> > While I see value in having the "since what version" info in the doc
> > strings, these particular doc strings don't need to use Doxygen
> > markup.
>
> Hm, do we actively discourage it? It seems like a good habit to
> stay in, and harmless enough.
We've made an effort to avoid the use Doxygen markup in internal
header files that don't have Doxygen run against them. That said, it
communicates the point pretty well. *shrug*
> > > /* A mindless implementation of svn_wc_conflict_resolver_func_t that
> > > * does absolutely nothing to resolve conflicts. */
> > > svn_error_t *
> > > @@ -260,7 +311,7 @@
> > > one of the 3 fulltexts, edit the merged file on the spot, or just
> > > skip the conflict (to be resolved later). */
> >
> > =2E..and this (new) one is missing such markup.
>
> Are you referring to svn_cl__conflict_handler? I didn't add it,
> so I didn't add the markup. Will fix.
Right, thanks.
...
> > > +svn_cl__conflict_handler(svn_wc_conflict_result_t *result,
> > > + const svn_wc_conflict_description_t *desc,
> > > + void *baton,
> > > + apr_pool_t *pool)
> > > {
> >
> > The changes to this routine are probably going to hork Augie F's patch.
>
> Oh, somehow I overlooked that. I'll take a look at it; let's see
> if we can get it committed first.
sussman reviewed Augie's patch, and I saw Augie mention on IRC that
he'd work on revising it based on Ben's comments.
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Mon Oct 1 22:11:53 2007