Mercurial > jhg

comparison design.txt @ 367:2fadf8695f8a

Find changesets by keywords (author, files, the commit message), revision number or hash, or revset expression.
Use 'revision index' instead of the vague 'local revision number' concept in the API
author Artem Tikhomirov <tikhomirov.artem@gmail.com>
date Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:37:27 +0100
parents 9ce3b26798c4
children 0ae53c32ecef
comparison
equal deleted inserted replaced
366:189dc6dc1c3e 367:2fadf8695f8a
124 124
125 ExecHelper('cmd', OutputParser()).run(). StatusOutputParser, LogOutputParser extends OutputParser. construct java result similar to that of cmd, compare results 125 ExecHelper('cmd', OutputParser()).run(). StatusOutputParser, LogOutputParser extends OutputParser. construct java result similar to that of cmd, compare results
126 126
127 Need better MethodRule than ErrorCollector for tests run as java app (to print not only MultipleFailureException, but distinct errors) 127 Need better MethodRule than ErrorCollector for tests run as java app (to print not only MultipleFailureException, but distinct errors)
128 Also consider using ExternalResource and TemporaryFolder rules. 128 Also consider using ExternalResource and TemporaryFolder rules.
129
130
131 =================
132 Naming:
133 nodeid: revision
134 int: revisionIndex (alternatives: revisionNumber, localRevisionNumber)
135 BUT, if class name bears Revision, may use 'index' and 'nodeid'
136 NOT nodeid because although fileNodeid and changesetNodeid are ok (less to my likening than fileRevision, however), it's not clear how
137 to name integer counterpart, just 'index' is unclear, need to denote nodeid and index are related. 'nodeidIndex' would be odd.
138 Unfortunately, Revision would be a nice name for a class <int, Nodeid>. As long as I don't want to keep methods to access int/nodeid separately
139 and not to stick to Revision struct only (to avoid massive instances of Revision<int,Nodeid> when only one is sufficient), I'll need to name
140 these separate methods anyway. Present opinion is that I don't need the object right now (will have to live with RevisionObject or RevisionDescriptor
141 once change my mind)