onsdagen den 27 augusti 2008 22.33.43 skrev Shawn O. Pearce:
> Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg.lists@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > @@ -197,8 +199,10 @@ synchronized (resources) {
> > > } // End ResCL
> > >
> > > void clearDecorationState(IResource r) throws CoreException {
> > > - r.setSessionProperty(GITFOLDERDIRTYSTATEPROPERTY, null);
> > > - fireLabelProviderChanged(new LabelProviderChangedEvent(this, r));
> > > + if (r.exists()) {
> > > + r.setSessionProperty(GITFOLDERDIRTYSTATEPROPERTY, null);
> > > + fireLabelProviderChanged(new LabelProviderChangedEvent(this, r));
> > > + }
> >
> > Shawn, you removed the test from the code in 4a230ea1. Perhaps you could care to
> > comment on this patch to restore the test, though slightly different.
> >
> > if (r.isAccessible())
> > r.setSessionProperty(GITFOLDERDIRTYSTATEPROPERTY, null);
>
> This may be a patch queue reordering bug.
>
> If you look at 4a230ea1 I moved the isAccessible test higher up,
> such that we shouldn't enter into clearDecorationState unless the
> resource is accessible. But there may currently be two code paths
> that enter this method, and a patch I did not yet submit had removed
> the other code path.
Good. So then the question is whether we should use isAccessible() or exists()? Normally
this makes no difference, but for a Project (at least) there is a difference. I project that exits
is not accessible when closed.
-- robin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
