Re: [fossil-users] Fix for stash-next pointer (fix for the fix)

2016-08-13 Thread Richard Hipp
On 8/13/16, Kain Abel wrote: > The next try: another version. > > (Prevents the growth from stash id after many push and pop operations.) But you still have not made your case for why growth of the stash id is a bad thing. > > Just for the sake of completeness, > Kain > --

Re: [fossil-users] Fix for stash-next pointer (fix for the fix)

2016-08-13 Thread Kain Abel
The next try: another version. (Prevents the growth from stash id after many push and pop operations.) Just for the sake of completeness, Kain stash-next_fix_fix.patch Description: Binary data ___ fossil-users mailing list

Re: [fossil-users] Fix for stash-next pointer

2016-08-13 Thread Kain Abel
Hi, 2016-08-13 16:38 GMT+02:00 Richard Hipp : > > And thus each new stash has a unique id. Is that a problem? not really, but the id is growing up. Uh, my patch doesn't work, when the last stash will be dropped. if( stashid==0 ) fossil_fatal("empty stash"); in line 401 will

Re: [fossil-users] Fix for stash-next pointer

2016-08-13 Thread Richard Hipp
On 8/13/16, Kain Abel wrote: > > after > $ fossil stash pop > or > $ fossil stash rm > is the pointer for the next stash id (stash-next in table vvar) untouched. And thus each new stash has a unique id. Is that a problem? -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org

[fossil-users] Fix for stash-next pointer

2016-08-13 Thread Kain Abel
Dear developers, after $ fossil stash pop or $ fossil stash rm is the pointer for the next stash id (stash-next in table vvar) untouched. Here a tiny patch hopefully without side effects. With regards, Kain stash-next_fix.patch Description: Binary data