Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 10:14:01 +0100: > Having it in the core is vastly more useful for people like me (and my > colleagues): works on Windows, regardless of whether or not one has > perl/python installed, no need to distribute an additional script, > guaranteed to be available everywhere an svn client is installed, ... >
You are talking about "having the functionality supported by the svn* binaries". I was talking about "having the functionality supported by the svn_fs_* API". I agree these questions are related, but they aren't precisely the same question. > It's actually quite similar to the way "blame" is implemented > currently: we don't really have the design (line-based information) to > do this quickly, but we calculate it from the other information that > we have available (in a way that could also be done by a script on the > client: diffing every interesting revision against the next, > remembering the lines that were added/removed in every step). > If svn_client_blameN() re-uses its RA session, then it has an advantage over a shell script that calls 'svn diff' repeatedly. I agree it still doesn't have an advantage over a C bindings script that calls svn_client_diffN() repeatedly.
