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?


View raw message