hehe... not that bothered by it. I wrote my email and raised
awareness. That's about where I want to be :-)
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Hyrum K. Wright
<hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>
> Karl Fogel wrote:
>>
>> "Greg Stein" <gstein_at_gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 4:44 PM, <hwright_at_tigris.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +++ trunk/subversion/tests/libsvn_fs/fs-test.c Thu Aug 21 16:44:23 2008 (r32628)
>>>> ...
>>>> @@ -4383,8 +4383,7 @@ verify_checksum(const char **msg,
>>>> svn_fs_txn_t *txn;
>>>> svn_fs_root_t *txn_root;
>>>> svn_stringbuf_t *str;
>>>> - unsigned char expected_digest[APR_MD5_DIGESTSIZE];
>>>> - unsigned char actual_digest[APR_MD5_DIGESTSIZE];
>>>> + svn_checksum_t *expected_checksum, *actual_checksum;
>>>
>>> It is highly preferred to have one symbol declaration per line.
>>
>> Not sure we've been following that consistently (also not sure everyone
>> would agree...) I leave it to you two to settle :-).
>
> I'm easy either way. As a general rule, I try to keep symbols declarations on separate lines, but in cases like this where there is tight coupling between the two I'm not as strict. There are *many* places where were we have multiple symbols defined together, and I'm hesitant to define a hard rule for reasons Karl mentions elsethread. In this case, I don't think I'll change it, but you're free to if it is too bothersome. :)
>
> -Hyrum
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-08-23 02:17:41 CEST