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

Re: revision number upper boundary?

From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_collab.net>
Date: 2005-03-09 01:06:45 CET

On Mar 8, 2005, at 5:54 PM, Zieg, Mark wrote:

>> So as long (heh!) as the subversion revision is kept typed as
>> 'long int', it will likely stay a 32 bit integer.
>>
>> (Hmmm, knowing nothing about the subversion wire protocol and/or on
>> disk formats, that 'long int' would worry me. Seems like it ought to
> be
>> int32_t...)
>
> I was a bit freaked that it wasn't declared "unsigned". What possible
> internal evilness would cause them to allow negative revision numbers?
> And if not valid, why define the type that way?
>

Because -1 is defined as SVN_INVALID_REVNUM. It's like a "NULL" value.
  We use it throughout the codebase.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Mar 9 01:09:14 2005

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