Re: Queries on two instances of __bind_int64(revnum) in WC

Daniel Shahaf wrote:

> Julian Foad wrote on Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 22:04:45 +0100:
>> One point being the semantics is different: _bind_revnum sets column to
>> NULL for INVALID_REVNUM.
>>
>> Don't know if INVALID_REVNUM ever can hit these two particular code
>> paths.
>
> You could check that by throwing an assert() there and running the test
> suite?

Could do; haven't done.

Greg said on IRC 'no reason for them, other than "code written before revnum binding code"', so I just changed them to _revnum in r1331733.

- Julian

>> > Index: subversion/libsvn_wc/entries.c
>> > ===================================================================
>> > +      /* ### Shouldn't this use __bind_revnum?  (If not, say why.) */
>> >        SVN_ERR(svn_sqlite__bind_int64(stmt, 7, node->revision));
>> > Index: subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c
>> > ===================================================================
>> > +      /* ### Shouldn't this use __bind_revnum?  (If not, say why.) */
>> >        SVN_ERR(svn_sqlite__bind_int64(stmt, 7, piwb->original_revnum));
Received on 2012-04-28 12:17:55 CEST