Greg Stein writes:
> Yes, svn_sqlite__update() *does* reset the statement before returning
> (it isn't something where you can iterate over results; it is done; so
> it resets the statement).
>
> Thus, the extra reset should not be there. "Following the pattern"
> isn't right here.
Ah, I didn't
Yes, svn_sqlite__update() *does* reset the statement before returning
(it isn't something where you can iterate over results; it is done; so
it resets the statement).
Thus, the extra reset should not be there. "Following the pattern"
isn't right here.
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 13:44, Philip Martin
Bert Huijben writes:
> Doesn't _update handle this specific reset? If not I think it should.
The compiler was complaing about a missing argument to
svn_error_createf. I was just following the pattern used by next
function.
>if (affected_rows != 1)
> return svn_error_createf(SVN_ERR_WC
Doesn't _update handle this specific reset? If not I think it should.
Bert Huijben (mobile phone)
- Oorspronkelijk bericht -
Van: phi...@apache.org
Verzonden: vrijdag 16 juli 2010 9:57
Aan: comm...@subversion.apache.org
Onderwerp: svn commit: r964704 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_
4 matches
Mail list logo
