Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Errors-To: <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020628141328.02a6f110@pop3.rowe-clan.net>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 14:14:19 -0500
To: Cliff Woolley <jwoolley@virginia.edu>
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
Subject: Re: Breaking something?  Now is the time?
Cc: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>, dev@apr.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.A41.4.32.0206281437040.38582-100000@node1.unix.Virgin
 ia.EDU>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020628133440.02a9a678@pop3.rowe-clan.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

If it is used by -anybody- they trust the existing implementation.

That said, it should behave sensibly.  The fact that you've asked three
times says you want to change it.

Make it so ;-)

Bill

At 01:38 PM 6/28/2002, Cliff Woolley wrote:
>On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> > IMHO, the implementation is what people have tested, not the documented
> > behavior.  Use the source, luke :-)
>
>But what I'm saying is that I don't think anybody *has* tested it.  I
>couldn't find a single use case in Apache where the called function would
>ever return anything other than 1, meaning that this "early-termination"
>functionality is not used by Apache AFAICT.
>
>--Cliff