Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 43470 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2001 00:37:04 -0000 Received: from 3ff8faf3.dsl.flashcom.net (HELO koj.covalent.net) (63.248.250.243) by h31.sny.collab.net with SMTP; 7 Jan 2001 00:37:04 -0000 Received: from rbb (helo=localhost) by koj.covalent.net with local-esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14F3sq-0005vB-00; Sat, 06 Jan 2001 16:40:28 -0800 Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 16:40:28 -0800 (PST) From: rbb@covalent.net X-Sender: rbb@koj To: Greg Stein cc: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: apr/network_io/unix sendrecv.c In-Reply-To: <20010106163553.K17220@lyra.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N > > Both methods do the same thing. I decided to put the checks in the code, > > because I am assuming that at some point we will actually add support for > > os_cork and os_uncork to the code. I wanted the special code to disable > > os_cork and os_uncork as close to the code that would use it as > > possible. I figured whoever adds support for os_cork and os_uncork will > > actually need to look at those functions, so they will see e > > !defined(__FreeBSD__), whereas if the special check was made in the > > configure script, that could go un-noticed when the changes were made, > > thus making it harder for the developer who does the work. > > > > I really don't care which we choose, but the warnings were bugging me, and > > I wanted them to go away. :-) > > Makes sense. I've added a reminder to apr/STATUS. Thanks, I always forget to add reminders. :-) Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------