apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Bloom <...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: [PATCH] APR thread updates and associated httpd-2.0 changes
Date Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:55:17 GMT

> > > Not if we hide this detail, I believe.  I don't know what that does
> > > about providing access to the apr_thread_t in the child thread. 
> > > Perhaps we declare the user's func as accepting arguments (apr_thread_t
> > > *me, void *mine).
> >
> > That was where Aaron started, and I asked him to change it to this model.
> > This model is more extensible moving forward IMHO.
> It makes binary compatibility much more fragile, so I can't parse your
> meaning for 'extensible'.
> Some public types have little to no reason to change, e.g. apr_finfo_t.
> Those that are more dynamic need to stay private.

Well, this is more extensible than passing everything as a separate 
parameter, because it just requires a re-compile.  If we go to separate 
parameters, then we require a code change.  I don't believe that the 
requirements for this type will change anytime soon.  Currently, we are 
passing the thread and the user's data, what else could EVERY thread need?


Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies			rbb@covalent.net

View raw message