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

Re: Reviewing r34562

From: Justin Erenkrantz <justin_at_erenkrantz.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:53:14 +0100

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 7:50 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> r34562 (which is proposed for backport to 1.5.x). It adds code that looks
> like so:
>
> /* abs_added_path had better be a child of abs_target_path
> or something is *really* wrong. */
> SVN_ERR_ASSERT(svn_path_is_child(abs_target_path,
> abs_added_path,
> iterpool));
> common_ancestor_path =
> svn_path_get_longest_ancestor(abs_added_path,
> abs_target_path,
> iterpool);
>
> I'm a little confused by these two statements, though. If ABS_ADDED_PATH is
> a child of ABS_TARGET_PATH, then isn't the longest ancestor common to the
> two of them necessarily ABS_TARGET_PATH? Could this be written as:
>
> common_ancestor_path =
> svn_path_get_longest_ancestor(abs_added_path,
> abs_target_path,
> iterpool);
> SVN_ERR_ASSERT(*common_ancestor_path);
>
> ?

Yah, this snippet struck me as being redundnant too, but I don't
*think* it should harm anything.

+1 if you want to change this and merge it back for 1.5.x. -- justin

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=985507
Received on 2008-12-17 09:16:56 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.