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

Re: svn commit: r955708 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/svnadmin/main.c

From: Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:08:56 -0500

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:01 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
>> @@ -1184,18 +1180,19 @@ set_revprop(const char *prop_name, const
>>    if (opt_state->use_pre_revprop_change_hook ||
>>        opt_state->use_post_revprop_change_hook)
>>      {
>> -      SVN_ERR(svn_repos_fs_change_rev_prop3
>> -              (repos, opt_state->start_revision.value.number,
>> -               NULL, prop_name, prop_value,
>> -               opt_state->use_pre_revprop_change_hook,
>> -               opt_state->use_post_revprop_change_hook, NULL, NULL, pool));
>> +      SVN_ERR(svn_repos_fs_change_rev_prop3(repos,
>> +                            opt_state->start_revision.value.number,
>> +                            NULL, prop_name, prop_value,
>> +                            opt_state->use_pre_revprop_change_hook,
>> +                            opt_state->use_post_revprop_change_hook, NULL,
>> +                            NULL, pool));
>
> Just out of curiosity, what is the indentation algorithm used in situations
> like this?  I've been unable to detect consistency so far.

1) Status quo
2) Aligned with first arg
3) Indented far enough to be recognizable as a parameter list

(2) is our preferred style, and what's documented in HACKING, iirc.
(3) is more of a convenience, if the function or parameter name makes
(2) impossible or unwieldy.

-Hyrum
Received on 2010-06-17 21:09:38 CEST

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