On 10/20/08 15:05, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
I see. But this surely doesn't apply to all-new files, no?
No (other than that you cannot checkout a file that exists in a working
copy using a different case, but that is to be expected with
caseinsensitive filesystems).
(is there an svn bug filed for this already?)
I dont know, maybe it is even fixed in current releases. I just remember
doing a svn mv on *nix once and as it gets translated to a deletion and
an addition with history, the addition might fail because the "old" file
is still there.
Ok, then fine with that - except that I'd veto the one-line
if-statement (prevents setting a breakpoint there for various
frontends),
I extended the description, one liners arent strictly forbidden, but
strongly adviced against.
and the non-alignment of statements (proper editors do
that en passant, and it's quicker to parse for the eye).
[Now you see where it leads, when trying to agree on formatting ;)]
We could fight a loooong fight about that one(*), but shouldnt (or we
should when we are sitting together some evening and having a beer).
Lets just keep it with "we agree to disagree" there. The writer team is
ok with the current proposal, if you want to propose the code
conventions to other team, just leave out those you dont like.
Please feel free to add recommandarions
about SAL_NO_VTABLE, SAL_DLLPUBLIC_EXPORT, SAL_DLLPUBLIC_IMPORT and
SAL_DLLPRIVATE.
Will do - seeing that you're working on it, can you ping me for a
handover in private?
Adding stuff shouldnt be a problem, so just go for it. However, existing
conventions have already meet the consensus of the writer team and thus
should be kept for now.
Have Fun,
Björn
(*) I would argue that alignment of statements is essential for deeply
nested languages like lisp and ocaml, but actually hurts with C/C++ or Java.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
