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

Re: diff4-optimization-bytes

From: Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 08:42:20 +0100

On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> Hyrum K Wright wrote on Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 21:47:12 -0600:
>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>> > Johan Corveleyn wrote on Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 13:20:29 +0100:
>> >> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>> >> > Could you have a look? (attached)
>> >>
>> >> Nice. It looks good to me (haven't tested it, just looked at the code;
>> >> I assume it passes with trunk?)
>> >>
>> >
>> > Thanks, yes, r1068749.
>> >
>> > While I'm here, in light of the truncation bug in diff3 earlier today,
>> > how about adding a warning to svn_diff_diff4_2() family of API's to the
>> > effect of "@warning This code is experimental"?
>>
>> How much more experimental is it than other recent code we've added to
>> trunk?
>
> s/experimental/under-exercised/
> (no known callers, only one unit test)
>
>> (And I hope that such an appellation would be only temporary;
>> experimental code close to a release is a Bad Thing.  Johan is working
>> hard to fix whatever Badness there may be.)
>>
>
> The experimental code is svn_diff_diff4_2(); AFAIK svn_diff_diff4() is
> as stable as ever.

I have no objections on adding such an annotation. However, from where
I'm sitting, svn_diff_diff4() is/was just as under-exercised as
svn_diff_diff4_2(), i.e. no known callers, only one unit test (thanks
for adding that test, BTW). Of course it's into the codebase a lot
longer than *_2, but it has never had any core code calling it, and no
unit tests (so could have been broken by any number of commits after
its inception till now).

-- 
Johan
Received on 2011-02-09 08:43:17 CET

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