apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Bloom <...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: apr_lock_data_get or just pool accessors?
Date Wed, 26 Sep 2001 00:49:13 GMT
On Tuesday 25 September 2001 04:23 pm, Aaron Bannert wrote:

Whatever we do here needs to be the same across all of the APR
types.  I would hestitate to remove the apr_lock_data_get/set
type of function, because they have been around for a while.

However, they could all easily migrate to macros now that we have
the pool accessor macro.

Ryan

> To make the new lock API complete, I had promised I would
> migrate the old apr_lock_data_get/set functions to the new
> apr_proc_mutex_data_get/set, at which point we have completely
> replaced all functionality in the old API. After looking at
> the implementation for apr_lock_data_get/set I realized that
> they are merely facades on top of apr_pool_userdata_get/set,
> with the mere convenience that they pass in the pool of the
> lock you gave it. This is how it is on all platforms.
>
> I propose that we simply add pool accessors instead, and let
> the caller deal with the pool directly for userdata_get/set.
> The old data_get/set functions are used in one place in httpd,
> for example, and would be trivial to convert to the new method
> that I'm proposing.
>
> -aaron

-- 

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

Mime
View raw message