Re: svn commit: r1070980 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/svnrdump/load_editor.c

2011-02-16 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Hi Daniel, Daniel Shahaf writes: > CC += artagnon > > Ramkumar, I think the lesson from Mike and I's recent fixes is: "Mark > unreachable code with a run-time assertion, not with a source comment". > > i.e., if those places were marked with SVN__NOT_IMPLEMENTED(), debugging > would have been eas

Re: svn commit: r1070980 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/svnrdump/load_editor.c

2011-02-16 Thread C. Michael Pilato
On 02/15/2011 10:40 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Daniel Shahaf wrote on Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 05:29:58 +0200: >> (Tests pass if I add a SVN__NOT_IMPLEMENTED() to that function.) >> > > On the other hand, some tests fail if I add SVN__NOT_IMPLEMENTED() to > remove_node_props(). Another one for the to

Re: svn commit: r1070980 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/svnrdump/load_editor.c

2011-02-15 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Daniel Shahaf wrote on Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 05:29:58 +0200: > (Tests pass if I add a SVN__NOT_IMPLEMENTED() to that function.) > On the other hand, some tests fail if I add SVN__NOT_IMPLEMENTED() to remove_node_props(). Another one for the todo list... > cmpil...@apache.org wrote on Tue, Feb 15

Re: svn commit: r1070980 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/svnrdump/load_editor.c

2011-02-15 Thread Daniel Shahaf
CC += artagnon Ramkumar, I think the lesson from Mike and I's recent fixes is: "Mark unreachable code with a run-time assertion, not with a source comment". i.e., if those places were marked with SVN__NOT_IMPLEMENTED(), debugging would have been easier. (Tests pass if I add a SVN__NOT_IMPLEMENTE