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

Re: svn commit: r28095 - trunk/subversion/tests/libsvn_repos

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_red-bean.com>
Date: 2007-11-28 03:08:26 CET

"David Glasser" <glasser@davidglasser.net> writes:
>> Log:
>> Follow up to r28022: test that poking a path under an excluded path fails.
>> * subversion/tests/libsvn_repos/repos-test.c
>> (reporter_depth_exclude): Try some illegal reporting, expect failure.
> In general, when we say that callers of an API must do something, do
> we guarantee that svn_error_t's are thrown if it's ignored? Seems
> like "undefined behavior" to me...

Well, that's a good question.

We don't, in general, promise a specific error every time we impose a
limitation on callers. We do promise a specific error when the error
is something a caller might want to test for. While it never hurts to
promise a specific error, the reporter's behavior in this regard is
sufficiently random (right now) that I didn't feel comfortable making
any particular error a guaranteed part of the API.

But it's still useful to test for the specific error in this case.
Even though the exact error isn't guaranteed by the doc string, if the
behavior were to ever change, we'd want to know about it (the reporter
code being sensitive stuff).

Reasonable? Or just lily-livered?


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Nov 28 03:08:37 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.