Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Replace ntohl() with g_ntohl() -> automated check?

[Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Ulf,

Ulf Lamping wrote:
> First of all, a big thank you to take some time to look at this topic. I 
> guess the only way to improve the current situation is to find an 
> automated way to find stuff like this and your approach looks promissing.

:-) Thanks

> > Does Subversion have the concept of a check-in trigger?  E.g., before 
> > accepting the check-in it runs a script and if the script returns an 
> > error, the check-in fails?  Could be done there, though that's a bit 
> > aggressive ;-).
> To be honest - I don't know. Gerald, do you have an idea (if it's 
> possible and if we probably want to have it that way)?

Today I wasn't feeling so lazy as yesterday and found:

http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.0/ch05s02.html#svn-ch-5-sect-2.1

so it seems it's possible (see the pre-commit description).

A first step might be to show the script's output to the person doing 
the commit but don't error out.  (There are way too many "errors" now to 
prevent check-ins.)

> > I even put a Copyright notice in case it's a good enough start.  :-)
> The only thing I'm a bit concerned about is if your script will fail on 
> "more sophisticated" combinations of C code, e.g. a comment with a 
> string in it and such - well, you get the point.

Actually I think it should work.  I just tested a string in a comment 
and a comment in a string and both came out fine.