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

Re: svn commit: r1003986 [1/2] - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: libsvn_client/ libsvn_fs_base/ libsvn_fs_base/bdb/ libsvn_fs_fs/ libsvn_ra_local/ libsvn_ra_neon/ libsvn_ra_serf/ libsvn_ra_svn/ libsvn_repos/ libsvn_subr/ libsvn_wc/ mod_authz_svn/ mod_dav_...

From: Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2010 18:25:17 +0200

On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 10:05:48AM +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
> stsp_at_apache.org writes:
> > Author: stsp
> > Date: Sun Oct 3 16:05:19 2010
> > New Revision: 1003986
> > * subversion/mod_authz_svn/mod_authz_svn.c
> > (get_access_conf, req_check_access, req_check_access): Use (const *)NULL
> > as sentinel for apr_pstrcat(), instead of NULL.
> That should be "(char *)" rather than "(const *)" in the log message.

Thanks, I'll fix that.

> The Subversion functions svn_path_join_many and svn_dirent_join_many
> also rely on a NULL sentinel; I assume calls to these functions should
> be fixed in the same way?

I think the warning is printed only for functions that are marked in
a special way that GCC looks for.
The svn_* functions don't have such markers.

So far I've seen both pros and cons for this commit.
Some have said it should be reverted, others have said the change was fine.

I'm indifferent, but of course slightly prefer not seeing these warnings
on my system as I'd like to see them in real error conditions only.
I'm happy to fix up any future missing casts if necessary.

I'll let the discussion settle, and let the community decide about
reverting the change. If we revert it, I'll just have to live with the
warnings. It's not that big of a deal.

Received on 2010-10-04 18:26:08 CEST

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