apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: io abstractions #2
Date Fri, 30 Jun 2006 02:04:19 GMT
david reid wrote:
> 
> I think that somehow people aren't really "on the same page" as I am, so 
> I'll try and explain again what I'm aiming for. When fully implemented 
> the IO abstraction will allow ANY app to create it's own type of 
> apr_io_t - which can then be mised/matched with any other type of 
> apr_io_t within the app. In my imagination the revised apr_ssl code 
> simply creates apr_io_t's - there is no longer a notion of 
> files/sockets/pipes or anything else. All the code currently under 
> network_io and file_io goes away - replaced instead by code unser simply 
> 'io'. The api is extensible - deliberatly so.
> 
> Now,if people don't want this or don't see a need then I'm happy to walk 
> away and forget it.

Can I offer a thought?  Maybe a unified apr_io_read/write and the assoicated
entry points are the way to go... if we implement in terms of today's code,
and roll this out before 2.0, I suspect we will discover if folks are very
friendly to the unified API, or if they demand explicit methods against the
specific objects they are working with?

Bill

Mime
View raw message