[svnbook commit] r2594 - branches/ora-2e-reorg/src/en/book
C. Michael Pilato
cmpilato at red-bean.com
Wed Jan 3 15:00:41 CST 2007
Malte Helmert wrote:
> cmpilato wrote:
>> + <para>The perceptive reader is probably wondering at this point if
>> + the peg revision syntax causes problems for working copy paths
>> + or URLs that actually have ampersand characters in them. After
>> + all, how does <command>svn</command> know whether
>> + <literal>news at 11</literal> is the name of a directory in my
>> + tree, or just a syntax for <quote>revision 11 of
>> + <filename>news</filename></quote>? Thankfully, while
>> + <command>svn</command> will always assume the latter, there is a
>> + trivial workaround. You need only append an ampersand to the
>> + end of the path, such as <literal>news at 11@</literal>.
>> + <command>svn</command> only cares about the last ampersand in
>> + the argument, and it is not considered illegal to omit a literal
>> + peg revision specifier after that ampersand. This workaround
>> + even applies to paths that end in an ampersand—you would
>> + use <literal>filename@@</literal> to talk about a file named
>> + <filename>filename@</filename>.</para>
> That shouldn't be "ampersand" there, as ampersand = "&"
> According to Wikipedia, the "@" is called "at sign", "at symbol",
> "commercial at", "at", or "ampersat"
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_sign). I'd steer clear of the last one
> though, because the similarity to "ampersand" is quite confusing.
Yeah, sussman pointed this out in IRC, too. I dunno why, by I keep
making this same mistake. Thanks for noticing.
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato at red-bean.com>
"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has
been found difficult; and left untried." -- G. K. Chesterton
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the svnbook-dev