On 3 Nov 2011, at 11:48, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > On 11/02/2011 05:42 PM, Barry Scott wrote: >> I wish that the canonical stuff was inside the svn_client_XXX API calls and >> not >> a burdon on callers. To my mind the svn.exe API and the svn_client_XXX should >> accept the same strings and either operate or return an error. Avoiding the >> asserts from using svn_client_XXX is the lions share of the work of getting >> svn binding sane. > > Two problems with such a move: > > - libsvn_client isn't the only API called from code outside of the > Subversion core distribution. What does to auto-canonicalization in > libsvn_client do if passing the same uncanonical path to libsvn_wc will then > crash?
Then the logic of the suituation would be that lib_svn_wc needed to change as well. > > - canonicalizing inside the API means the API must therefore assume that > input paths are not canonical. That means performing the same > canonicalization over and over again each time the API is called. That's > wasteful. Better to ask the highest level of code to make its input conform > once (we even offer the functions to do so!) and then take advantage of > known-good input from then on. From my point of view svn_client_XXX is the highest level of code I call. I convert to canonical on every call of svn. Its saves nothing. I think it makes using the svn API unnecessarily complex. I'm under no illusions that this is likely to change, but I wanted to bring this issue to your attention. Barry
