You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Philip Martin <ph...@codematters.co.uk> on 2004/12/19 22:24:56 UTC

Re: svn commit: r12384 - branches/1.1.x-r12327/subversion/libsvn_repos

maxb@tigris.org writes:

> Author: maxb
> Date: Sat Dec 18 15:42:32 2004
> New Revision: 12384
>
> Modified:
>    branches/1.1.x-r12327/subversion/libsvn_repos/load.c
> Log:
> Commit backport to temporary branch.

I guess my comment really applies to the trunk, but I didn't spot the
issue at the time:

> +  err = svn_fs_commit_txn (&conflict_msg, &(*new_rev), rb->txn, rb->pool);

Why "&(*new_rev)" and not just "new_rev"?

-- 
Philip Martin

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

Re: svn commit: r12384 - branches/1.1.x-r12327/subversion/libsvn_repos

Posted by Greg Hudson <gh...@MIT.EDU>.
On Sun, 2004-12-19 at 18:21, Philip Martin wrote:
> "Max Bowsher" <ma...@ukf.net> writes:
> >> Why "&(*new_rev)" and not just "new_rev"?
> >
> > Deliberate to emphasise it's role as an output parameter.
> 
> How bizarre!  I've never seen that idiom before, I find it confusing,
> and I don't think it's a good idea.

Agreed.  Just "new_rev" would be less confusing.


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

Re: svn commit: r12384 - branches/1.1.x-r12327/subversion/libsvn_repos

Posted by Philip Martin <ph...@codematters.co.uk>.
"Max Bowsher" <ma...@ukf.net> writes:

> Philip Martin wrote:
>> maxb@tigris.org writes:
>>
>>> +  err = svn_fs_commit_txn (&conflict_msg, &(*new_rev), rb->txn,
>>> rb->pool);
>>
>> Why "&(*new_rev)" and not just "new_rev"?
>
> Deliberate to emphasise it's role as an output parameter.

How bizarre!  I've never seen that idiom before, I find it confusing,
and I don't think it's a good idea.

-- 
Philip Martin

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

Re: svn commit: r12384 - branches/1.1.x-r12327/subversion/libsvn_repos

Posted by Max Bowsher <ma...@ukf.net>.
Philip Martin wrote:
> maxb@tigris.org writes:
>
>> Author: maxb
>> Date: Sat Dec 18 15:42:32 2004
>> New Revision: 12384
>>
>> Modified:
>>    branches/1.1.x-r12327/subversion/libsvn_repos/load.c
>> Log:
>> Commit backport to temporary branch.
>
> I guess my comment really applies to the trunk, but I didn't spot the
> issue at the time:
>
>> +  err = svn_fs_commit_txn (&conflict_msg, &(*new_rev), rb->txn, 
>> rb->pool);
>
> Why "&(*new_rev)" and not just "new_rev"?

Deliberate to emphasise it's role as an output parameter.

Max.


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