Re: [PATCH] please review: kicking off the tree-conflicts branch

On Dec 3, 2007 11:16 AM, Stefan Sperling <stsp@elego.de> wrote:
> Hey Erik,
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 09:30:41PM +0100, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> > - The patch picks up a comment line in libsvn_wc/wc.h about there
> > being no #define for DEPTH because it's only relevant to the THIS_DIR
> > entry. From your description, I get the feeling the same applies to
> > the TREE_CONFLICT_DATA and TREE_CONFLICT_DESCRIPTION items. Is that
> > correct? And do you think it's like DEPTH enough to do without the
> > defines?
>
> Hmmm...
>
> We honestly don't know.
>
> Can someone explain why fold_entry in libsvn_wc/entries.c does not require a
> modify flag for depth? A comment says depth was "only meaningful on the
> this-dir entry anyway". Why does not needing a modify flag follow from this?
> Is it because for files, the depth will be inherited from the parent directory?

Well, files don't have a depth, and almost all data about directories
should be drawn from their '.' entry in their own directory rather
than the one in their parent.

I don't really follow that comment, though.

The reason it works now is that the only place to change a depth after
initialization is in libsvn_wc/update_editor.c(complete_directory),
which doesn't use svn_wc__entry_modify (which is the caller of
fold_entry). This is more of an explanation of why it works than why
it is this way, though.

--dave

-- 
David Glasser | glasser_at_davidglasser.net | http://www.davidglasser.net/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org