apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Karl Fogel <kfo...@newton.ch.collab.net>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apr/memory/unix apr_pools.c
Date Tue, 22 Oct 2002 14:00:02 GMT
"Bill Stoddard" <bill@wstoddard.com> writes:
> > This is just a design difference. Most shells don't make a difference
> > between unset and NULL-value. This problem hasn't come up before, and
> > you haven't provided a concrete reason why it is broken now.
> I agree with Aaron here.

Same.  Hash implementations in C often don't allow NULL values (i.e.,
they overload NULL to mean key not present).  I'm not saying it's the
only possible interface, but it's a reasonable one because C itself
doesn't distinguish between boolean false and NULL.  Anyone who needs
to distinguish can use wrapper structures for the values, after all.

Plus, if we change this interface, *lots* code that uses APR will have
to change.

I'm not sure what the implications of this are for Ryan's original
change to apr_pools.c.


View raw message