Re: Changing the log API is not worth it

Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:

> Yesterday, I discovered an inconsistency in our log API.
> svn_revnum_t is a long while the "limit" parameter is
> an int.

It is not semantically necessary to be able to request an arbitrarily large batch of log messages -- in other words, for the "limit" parameter to be the same as, or as big as, svn_revnum_t.

> Since we have a practical limit of 2^31 on our revision
> numbers

Just curious: can you easily point to the source(s) of this practical limit?  I'm not particularly surprised, but I wasn't aware of it.

> and because int is (at least) 32 bits on all our
> targets, switching the limit parameter to long is a pretty
> much a mere formality.
>
> The fix ripples through all ra layers and such blowing
> the patch up to more then 700 lines. So, I think it is
> simply not worth it.

So I agree that it's not worth changing, for both your reason and mine.

- Julian
Received on 2012-06-14 23:47:13 CEST