On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Stefan Fuhrmann <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Bert Huijben <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >> > Sent: maandag 11 februari 2013 21:47 >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: svn commit: r1444956 - in /subversion/branches/fsfs- >> > format7/subversion: libsvn_client/patch.c libsvn_fs_fs/fs.c >> > libsvn_fs_fs/fs_fs.c libsvn_fs_fs/hotcopy.c libsvn_fs_fs/transaction.c >> > libsvn_repos/repos.c libsvn_wc/adm_files.c >> > >> > Author: stefan2 >> > Date: Mon Feb 11 20:47:10 2013 >> > New Revision: 1444956 >> > >> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1444956 >> > Log: >> > On the fsfs-format7 branch: update callers of the deprecated >> > svn_io_file_create to svn_io_file_create2. Use the default (0) >> > length value everywhere, except for those few places where the >> > actual length is obvious and unlikely to change >> >> Why did you deprecate this function instead of adding a separate optimized >> variant for your use case. > > > I didn't want to introduce e.g. svn_io_file_create_binary > alongside svn_io_file_create. svn_io_file_create2 lifting > svn_io_file_create's limitation of accepting C strings only > seemed like a logical extension of the original functionality > and not something completely different. > >> I don't think providing an explicit size makes sense for the average >> caller? > > svn_io_file_create is often used to create empty files. > So, we should then also have svn_io_file_create_empty() > to save the unnecessary empty string parameter. > > I opted for keeping the number of functions in our API low. > But I don't have strong feelings about that. > I completely agree with Bert: optimization should not make developing harder. svn_io_file_create_empty() is fine for me. We already have such functions for string_t and stringbuf_t.
-- Ivan Zhakov
