On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 3:28 PM Vincent Lefevre <vincent-...@vinc17.net> wrote: > On 2020-01-08 13:12:21 +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > Vincent Lefevre wrote on Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 10:28:01 +0100: > > > On 2020-01-07 16:10:52 +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > > > Vincent Lefevre wrote on Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 16:17:10 +0100: > > > > > On 2019-12-23 06:35:08 +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > > > > > Two things are not immediately clear to me: > > > > > > > > > > > > - This info is only needed by the cmdline client, not by other > > > > > > library users. This suggests the API should be generic. A > > > > > > per-client cache, maybe? There's already a > > > > > > svn_client_ctx_t::client_name so it's not unprecedented. > > > > > > > > > > Well, you don't know what the library users will do. Perhaps the cache > > > > > will benefit them too. The value can be used by them or not. > > > > > > > > I think you've missed my point. I'm saying we should try to design the > > > > cache > > > > API in a way that will allow it to be used not only for 'svn ls -v' but > > > > also > > > > for other things. The API does not exist to serve the cmdline client; > > > > it > > > > exists to serve _all_ svn clients. > > > > > > I entirely agree. But I'm still confused by your first sentence above > > > "This info is only needed by the cmdline client, not by other library > > > users." or perhaps you misplaced the "not"? > > > > The length of the longest author name is needed by 'svn ls -v'. > > > > The length of the longest author name is unlikely to be needed by > > other consumers of the svn_client_* API. > > A reimplementation of "svn ls -v" or "svn blame" may find this useful > information. Graphical clients may be interested in a cached full list > of authors to compute the size of the corresponding column.
Since both 'svn ls -v' and 'svn blame' can be called on a repository URL, I don't really see the point in caching the max(length(author)) of the working copy. The output from a URL would still be mis-aligned. It would make the presentation inconsistent between calling it on a working copy and on a URL. Just my 2 cents ... -- Johan
