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

Re: svn commit: r26853 - trunk/subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/svn

From: Daniel Rall <dlr_at_collab.net>
Date: 2007-10-02 01:06:37 CEST

On Mon, 01 Oct 2007, Joe Swatosh wrote:
> On 10/1/07, Daniel Rall <dlr@collab.net> wrote:
> > Why does proplist take a depth parameter, while propget and propset
> > take a recurse parameter (e.g. backwards compat)?
> Looks like I screwed it up months ago:
> ================================
> Revision: 25019
> Author: joeswatosh
> Date: 11:13:50 PM, Monday, May 14, 2007
> Message:
> Follow on to r25007 which added depth support to svn_client_proplist3.
> * subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/svn/client.rb
> (Svn::Client::Context#proplist) changed argument name and default to
> reflect the use of depth instead of recurse in the core API.
> Reviewed by: kou
> dlr

That doesn't look so screwed up...

> I think you're on to something in the other thread. Probably all
> (proplist, propset and propget) should take a 'recurse_or_depth'
> parameter that we should turn into a depth before we pass along. I
> think that way we can turn a True or False into the depth we want.
> Especially since it may not always match SVN_DEPTH_FROM_RECURSE in
> every case.

...especially once we have something like this, which sounds good.

We'll need two varieties of svn_swig_rb_to_depth(), for selecting
between the non-recursive mode of empty vs. files, similar to the way
we have both a SVN_DEPTH_FROM_RECURSE() and
SVN_DEPTH_FROM_RECURSE_STATUS() macros -- the latter of which needs to
be renamed to something more generic -- in the core libraries.

  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Tue Oct 2 01:06:46 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.