Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 7391 invoked by uid 500); 15 Jul 2002 05:26:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 7380 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2002 05:26:36 -0000 Message-ID: <3D325D41.4050809@apache.org> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 22:27:29 -0700 From: Ian Holsman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020713 X-Accept-Language: zu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rbb@covalent.net, dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: IO abstraction layer for files References: <3D321D1B.2000800@apache.org> <00b001c22ba3$d5c7a610$0a01230a@KOJ> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Ryan Bloom wrote: > We had an IO abstraction layer a long time ago. The original one was > bulky, hard to debug, and didn't solve the problem it was designed to > solve, namely filtering. When the filters were introduced, the IOLs > were removed, because they were no longer needed. > > I guess my only question, is what problem are you trying to solve with > an IOL? Until we have an answer to that, there is really no way to know > if they are a good idea or not. Every time that they have come up in > the past, the reason was never enough to justify adding the complexity > and performance problems. Remember that in general, an IOL would mean > that every time you wanted to read to or write from a file or network, > you would do a pointer de-ref and call an extra function. I'm thinking of how you would implement a event driven MPM, where you wouldn't want a module to block on a read. AND not have the module designers have to rewrite their modules --Ian > > Ryan > > ---------------------------------------------- > Ryan Bloom rbb@covalent.net > 645 Howard St. rbb@apache.org > San Francisco, CA > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Ian Holsman [mailto:ianh@apache.org] >>Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 5:54 PM >>To: dev@apr.apache.org >>Subject: IO abstraction layer for files >> >>I know this topic has come up several times in the past, >>but I can't remember the outcome/reasoning on why we didn't >>want to re-introduce the IO Layer for file operations.. >> >>TIA >>Ian > > >