apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@attglobal.net>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apr/test testdso.c
Date Tue, 03 Jun 2003 22:28:01 GMT
Branko ─îibej wrote:
> Jeff Trawick wrote:
> I disagree. Encouraging the use of platform tests instead of feature
> tests is a very bad idea. Certainly, APR needs platform tests
> internally, but it should not expose platform knowledge directly to the
> user. Instead, the differences should be hidden in feature-test macros
> and constants; in this case, there should be a symbol for the (default)
> shared library name suffix.
> 
> Imagine the mess if all APR users started to use APR_PLATFORM_IS_HPUX to
> decide the .so vs. .sl thing... this is exactly what APR is meant to avoid.

Is APR a babysitter?

I would encourage people to use an APR define instead of

__hpux
__hpux__
__linux__
_AIX
SOLARIS2
__MVS__
WIN32
__whatevertheheck

in the rare places where such a check is useful. 
Lowest-common-denominator code doesn't need such a check.  Some other 
code does.  If people use it elsewhere that's their problem, and they 
were going to make the platform check anyway.  At least it might be more 
consistent and easier to locate in their code.


Mime
View raw message