apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From <...@apache.org>
Date Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:17:22 GMT

On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Joe Orton wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 10:12:17AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > So, I continue to wonder, how is it useful to have this in a _portable_
> > run-time, when the concept isn't at all portable?
> Will you also be removing threads, IPv6, and all the other stuff which
> isn't implemented on every single platforms APR supports?

Come on.   Those features are supported on most of the platforms we
support.  The one we are talking about is _UN_supported on most of the
platforms we support.  We have always had the concept of APR_ENOTIMPL, for
features that couldn't be implemented on a given platform.  But, that
reutrn code was meant to be the exception, not the rule.  In this case, we
have a feature that APR uses internally (and that nobody has asked for
externally), but that we have exposed to the outside world, even though it
is a completely non-portable concept.  Most platforms just can't do this.


View raw message