Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

2011-05-28 Thread Stefan Küng
On 29.05.2011 04:31, Greg Stein wrote: On May 28, 2011 1:39 PM, "Stefan Küng" mailto:tortoise...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On 28.05.2011 19:33, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >> >> Fair enough. >> >> However, we don't have a practice of keeping declarations without >> corresponding definitions. If th

Re: [RFC] Final approach for issue #3702 (case-only renames on Windows)?

2011-05-28 Thread Johan Corveleyn
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: > 1) Rev svn_client_args_to_target_array to take an argument "is_move". > That's really the only case where something special needs to happen. > Something like this: > >if (is_move && input_targets->nelts == 2 >&& strcmp(original

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

2011-05-28 Thread Greg Stein
On May 28, 2011 1:39 PM, "Stefan Küng" wrote: > > On 28.05.2011 19:33, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >> >> Fair enough. >> >> However, we don't have a practice of keeping declarations without >> corresponding definitions. If that is indeed the case (as opposed to >> definitions which are conditional on pr

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

2011-05-28 Thread Stefan Küng
On 28.05.2011 19:33, Daniel Shahaf wrote: Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 19:05:34 +0200: On 28.05.2011 19:03, Daniel Shahaf wrote: Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 15:43:58 +0200: I think having such functions mentioned in the header but not implemented is not good. Why a

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

2011-05-28 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 19:05:34 +0200: > On 28.05.2011 19:03, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >> Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 15:43:58 +0200: >>> I think having such functions mentioned in the header but not >>> implemented is not good. >> >> Why are you telling us that? You h

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

2011-05-28 Thread Stefan Küng
On 28.05.2011 19:03, Daniel Shahaf wrote: Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 15:43:58 +0200: I think having such functions mentioned in the header but not implemented is not good. Why are you telling us that? You have commit access. I don't want to break something. Maybe those will g

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

2011-05-28 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 15:43:58 +0200: > I think having such functions mentioned in the header but not > implemented is not good. Why are you telling us that? You have commit access.

Windows build, nonexistent functions

2011-05-28 Thread Stefan Küng
Hi, While trying to change the svn build with the scripts I use in TSVN I discovered that there are several functions mentioned in header files that don't exist anywhere else, i.e. the functions are not implemented in any c files. They only exist in the headers. I haven't tried this, but my

Re: [PATCH] Speed-up of libsvn_diff by reworking fp argument

2011-05-28 Thread Morten Kloster
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 8:41 PM, Morten Kloster wrote: > [[[ > Faster LCS algorithm in libsvn_diff by reworking fp argument > > * subversion/libsvn_diff/lcs.c >  (svn_diff__snake): fp and k arguments are added by caller > ]]] > > Calling svn_diff__snake with fp+k as argument instead of both as > s

Re: [PATCH] Simplification/speed-up of libsvn_diff by eliminating idx

2011-05-28 Thread Morten Kloster
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote: [] > > Actually, about the theory behind the algorithm: I think it would be > quite beneficial if lcs.c would contain more high level documentation > about how the algorithm works, and why it works. Right now it only > contains this referenc

Re: [PATCH] Simplification/speed-up of libsvn_diff by eliminating idx

2011-05-28 Thread Johan Corveleyn
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Morten Kloster wrote: > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Julian Foad wrote: >> On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 13:32 +0200, Johan Corveleyn wrote: >>> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Fuhrmann Stefan (ETAS/ESA1) >>> wrote: >>> > Morten Kloster wrote: >>> > >>> >> [[[ >>>