On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 10:17:01AM +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> FWIW the original reasoning is in Karl's comment in parse_one_rev():
>
> /* Allow any number of 'r's to prefix a revision number, because
> that way if a script pastes svn output into another svn command
> (like "svn log -r${REV_COPIED_FROM_OUTPUT}"), it'll Just Work,
> even when compounded.
>
> I guess that means "even if one script, when given 'r123' as input, were
> to print 'rr123' as output, then we could still pass in that output as
> '-r rr123' and it would still work".
>
> It seems bogus (unnecessary) to me.
I use this feature regularly when copy-pasting revnums from log
messages, the #svn-dev channel, email, viewvc, etc. into the command
line. Maybe depending on how I move the mouse and the 'r' becomes
part of the paste buffer or maybe it doesn't. Some of these consider
'r' part of the "word" when I double click the revnum to mark it
for copy-pasting. Some don't. For some the double-click doesn't work.
It is really convenient to just type -r into the terminal and then
paste the number knowing that it will just work for all these cases.
I think the case Karl meant was there a script gets 123 as input
and outputs r123?
