Hi Paul.
A bit more review.
> + If TARGETS contains a single URL and one or more relative paths, then
> + set *RA_TARGET to a copy of that URL and *CONDENSED_PATHS to a copy of
> + each relative path after the URL.
> [...]
> +resolve_log_targets()
s/CONDENSED_PATHS/RELATIVE_TARGETS/.
> +find_youngest_and_oldest_revs(...)
> +{
> [...]
> + return;
> +}
Redundant "return".
> + if (memcmp(&(range->start), &(range->end),
> + sizeof(svn_opt_revision_t)) == 0)
> + start_same_as_end = TRUE;
I don't think 'memcmp' is a safe way of comparing svn_opt_revision_t
structures, since they may have holes for padding. From the context, I can see
you are comparing them only in order to eliminate duplicate look-ups of the
same value, so a false negative result would still produce a correct final
result. Nevertheless, I don't like it, but the next observation may make this
point moot.
These functions:
resolve_wc_opt_revs()
resolve_wc_head_revs()
resolve_wc_date_revs()
together with the code that calls them, seem to be implementing the basic
"convert an svn_opt_revision_t to a revision number" functionality that we
already have in other places. Is that right? If so, could we avoid re-writing
that functionality here?
The only thing it appears to be doing that a simple call to, say,
svn_client__get_revision_number() doesn't do, is avoid opening a session if one
is not needed here. Instead, couldn't we change
svn_client__get_revision_number() to be able to open a session iff one is
needed? But wait -- in fact we're going to need a session anyway -- the caller
opens one if this function doesn't. So can't we simply open one before calling
this function, and let this function make simple calls to
svn_client__get_revision_number()?
- Julian
C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Was reviewing your svn_client_log5() changes. There are a couple of places
> in your reworked svn_client_log5() code (resolve_log_targets(),
> specifically) that read like so or similar:
>
> if (peg_revision->kind == svn_opt_revision_unspecified)
> (*peg_revision).kind = svn_opt_revision_head;
>
> Is there any reason for that not to be simply:
>
> if (peg_revision->kind == svn_opt_revision_unspecified)
> peg_revision->kind = svn_opt_revision_head;
>
> ?
>
> Also, I would suggest that, instead of initializing the *relative_targets
> array with a single slot, we go ahead and use the number of slots we know
> we'll need (so we can avoid resizing the array later):
>
> /* Initialize the output array. At a minimum, we need room for one
> (possibly empty) relpath. Otherwise, we have to hold a relpath
> for every item in TARGETS except the first. */
> *relative_targets = apr_array_make(result_pool,
> MAX(1, targets->nelts - 1),
> sizeof(const char *));
>
>
> Finally, do we need to be strdup()ing the stuff we put into the
> relative_targets array? Looks to me (via code inspection) like perhaps not.
>
> It's entirely possible that you didn't introduce any of this stuff with
> your
> recent code reorg here -- I'm not claiming otherwise -- but I wanted to make
> sure you agreed with me before I started messing around in that relatively
> complex bit of code.
