Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The LogDate idea is a good solution. Do we think we can get it
>>> implemented in time for the release? If not, I still think we should
>>> just back out these changes and do this in 1.6.
>> I have attached a patch which adds a LogDate class and uses it in
>> SVNClient. The C++ would need to be changed to store a LogDate object
>> in the Map for the svn:date entry.
>
> Attaching a second patch. This adds a test case for the LogDate
> class. This patch just includes the test.
>
>
The LogDate looks good. A couple of comments.
Does JDK < 1.5 support annotations?
I think getDate should be synchronized.
In this code
+ LogDate date = (LogDate) revprops.get("svn:date");
+ if (date == null) date = new LogDate(0);
That assumes revprops will return a LogDate for the svn:date property? And
people have to cast it? Seems clumsy. I like a stronger interface where people
don't have to do casts when possible.
Blair
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-05-24 00:02:49 CEST