apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff Trawick" <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [PATCH] Optimized MD5 implementation from OpenSSL
Date Wed, 03 Jan 2007 19:37:29 GMT
On 1/3/07, Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com> wrote:
> On 1/3/07, Joe Orton <jorton@redhat.com> wrote:

> > 1. is having an ENOTIMPL _set_xlate really an excusable regression?
> Yes.  We already do that for !APR_HAS_XLATE case, so callers need to
> handle that anyway.

assert(there's no necessary initialization for _set_xlate to perform
when using the OpenSSL MD5 implementation), so shouldn't it be an
empty function that returns APR_SUCCESS?

If the assertion is not known to be correct then we need to research a
bit further, with the goal that we either return APR_SUCCESS (no
initialization needed) or avoid the use of OpenSSL MD5 at build time
when we know the _set_xlate() must be called.

Make sense?

View raw message