On 24.12.2011 11:25, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 24.12.2011 11:06, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Branko Čibej wrote on Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 23:52:08 +0100:
>>> Ranting is all very well, but I've yet to hear a suggestion from you
>>> about how the libraries should handle unrecoverable errors. Like, for
>>> example, the case where wc.db contains inconsistent and/or invalid data.
>> Distinguish "The internal state of the library is fubar'd" from "The
>> {wc,repos} is fubar'd", and use SVN_ERR_ASSERT() for the former and
>> normal errors for invalid on-disk data?
>>
>> (and, sure, if we detect a wc is corrupt then we block all further
>> operations on it)
> That's pretty much the definition of meeting TSVN halfway, isn't it?
>And ... good luck in finding a way to reliably tell the difference between data corruption and library fubar. -- Brane
