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

Re: svn commit: r40186 - branches/1.6.x-future-proof/subversion/libsvn_wc

From: Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:14:24 +0100

On Oct 23, 2009, at 3:56 AM, Greg Stein wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 18:21, Hyrum K. Wright
> <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>> I went to the trouble to read the format number so that it would
>> fit within
>> our existing "oops, I've got a format number higher than I know
>> what to do
>> with" paradigm. I realize we could just set it to 99 or something
>> equally
>> as bogus, but that felt too hacky and grabbing the format number is
>> a single
>> function call.
>> But frankly, whatever performance difference that exists shouldn't
>> matter
>> very much anyway, since this is an error condition, and that
>> condition isn't
>> likely to be hit. (What I *would* like, though, would be a way to
>> say
>> "you're part of the wc-ng working copy rooted at /bar/gruff/foo".
>> Oh well.)
> You can do that, no problem. Have is_inside_wc_ng() raise that
> specific error, rather than returning a version number. It knows the
> root of the wc-ng tree.
> And since it is raising an error, it doesn't even have to get into the
> format number game. It has two options: raise an error, or return 0
> for "not a wc". Simpler, *and* you get what you want.

Turns out we still had to return an version number, but your comments
applied in r40233.


Received on 2009-10-27 18:14:40 CET

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.