Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: > Yesterday, I discovered an inconsistency in our log API. > svn_revnum_t is a long while the "limit" parameter is > an int.
It is not semantically necessary to be able to request an arbitrarily large batch of log messages -- in other words, for the "limit" parameter to be the same as, or as big as, svn_revnum_t. > Since we have a practical limit of 2^31 on our revision > numbers Just curious: can you easily point to the source(s) of this practical limit? I'm not particularly surprised, but I wasn't aware of it. > and because int is (at least) 32 bits on all our > targets, switching the limit parameter to long is a pretty > much a mere formality. > > The fix ripples through all ra layers and such blowing > the patch up to more then 700 lines. So, I think it is > simply not worth it. So I agree that it's not worth changing, for both your reason and mine. - Julian
