Hi Everyone,
As Edmund goes through the header files and finds things in the
comments that he doesn't understand - there is always a nice succinct
reply from "someone" that clears up his understanding of the comment
in question.
Would it not be appropriate to change the documentation to be the
provided succinct response, so that it might be clear(er) for all who
visit the code next time around?
Gavin.
On 19/04/2009, at 3:40 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 17:27, Edmund Wong <ed_at_kdtc.net> wrote:
>> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>>
>>>> /** If not NULL, an open working copy access baton to either the
>>>> * path itself (if @c path is a directory), or to the parent
>>>> * directory (if @c path is a file.)
>>>
>>> This doc string is complete.
>>> If 'access' is NULL, then it doesn't point to anything.
>>> If 'access' isn't NULL, then it points to an open working copy
>>> access baton.
>>>
>> Ah. Now I understand. 'to' is being used as a verb, right?
>
> Yes. As in "points to" or "opened to" or something like that.
>
> Access batons are associated with directories, which is why the
> docstring clarifies the baton based on the path's kind.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1793385
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1815027
Received on 2009-04-20 02:28:09 CEST