You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by "Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se> on 2005/04/26 18:24:29 UTC

Re: svn commit: r14452 - trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 dlr@tigris.org wrote:

> Author: dlr
> Date: Tue Apr 26 12:06:25 2005
> New Revision: 14452
>
> Modified:
>    trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
>
> Log:
> * subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
>   (apr_dir_is_empty): Removed inline comment asking about the

Not directly related to this commit, but does anyone know why we have a
function with an apr_ name as an internal static? I think it should just
be moved inside svn_io_is_empty().

Regards,
//Peter

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: svn commit: r14452 - trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr

Posted by kf...@collab.net.
"Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se> writes:
> Yeah, ad now it is just a little confusing that it looks lie a function of
> our API, but is internal. I don't think it's a big prlblem; we control our
> own namespace. Why do you use prefixes at all for a static function?

I shouldn't have; fixed in r14472.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: svn commit: r14452 - trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr

Posted by "Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se>.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 kfogel@collab.net wrote:

> Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com> writes:
> > >> * subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
> > >>   (apr_dir_is_empty): Removed inline comment asking about the
> > >
> > >Not directly related to this commit, but does anyone know why we have a
> > >function with an apr_ name as an internal static? I think it should just
> > >be moved inside svn_io_is_empty().
> >
> > In r2404, Karl Fogel says:
> >
> > * subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
> >   (apr_dir_is_empty): Replaces apr_check_dir_empty, declare static.
> >   Document in APR style, in preparation for move to APR.  Rewrite
> >   body, now check for "." and ".." explicitly.  Change calling
> >   discipline.  I love saying that: "calling discipline".  There, I
> >   said it again.
> >   (svn_io_dir_empty): New function, wrapper for above.
>
> Heh, and this is proof of why we shouldn't do things that way.
>
> Instead, I should have given it an "svn_" prefix, and mentioned in its
> doc string what was going on.  All of which is now done in r14457.
>
Yeah, ad now it is just a little confusing that it looks lie a function of
our API, but is internal. I don't think it's a big prlblem; we control our
own namespace. Why do you use prefixes at all for a static function?

Regards,
//Peter - who maybe has too much time for details

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: svn commit: r14452 - trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr

Posted by kf...@collab.net.
Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com> writes:
> >> * subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
> >>   (apr_dir_is_empty): Removed inline comment asking about the
> >
> >Not directly related to this commit, but does anyone know why we have a
> >function with an apr_ name as an internal static? I think it should just
> >be moved inside svn_io_is_empty().
> 
> In r2404, Karl Fogel says:
> 
> * subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
>   (apr_dir_is_empty): Replaces apr_check_dir_empty, declare static.
>   Document in APR style, in preparation for move to APR.  Rewrite
>   body, now check for "." and ".." explicitly.  Change calling
>   discipline.  I love saying that: "calling discipline".  There, I
>   said it again.
>   (svn_io_dir_empty): New function, wrapper for above.

Heh, and this is proof of why we shouldn't do things that way.

Instead, I should have given it an "svn_" prefix, and mentioned in its
doc string what was going on.  All of which is now done in r14457.

Thanks,
-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: svn commit: r14452 - trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr

Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 20:24 +0200, Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
>On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 dlr@tigris.org wrote:
>
>> Author: dlr
>> Date: Tue Apr 26 12:06:25 2005
>> New Revision: 14452
>>
>> Modified:
>>    trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
>>
>> Log:
>> * subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
>>   (apr_dir_is_empty): Removed inline comment asking about the
>
>Not directly related to this commit, but does anyone know why we have a
>function with an apr_ name as an internal static? I think it should just
>be moved inside svn_io_is_empty().

In r2404, Karl Fogel says:

* subversion/libsvn_subr/io.c
  (apr_dir_is_empty): Replaces apr_check_dir_empty, declare static.
  Document in APR style, in preparation for move to APR.  Rewrite
  body, now check for "." and ".." explicitly.  Change calling
  discipline.  I love saying that: "calling discipline".  There, I
  said it again.
  (svn_io_dir_empty): New function, wrapper for above.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org