apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Modular APR
Date Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:09:00 GMT
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 05:43:52PM +0100, William Rowe wrote:
> Mladen Turk wrote:
>> Joe Orton wrote:
>>> On the topic of how to split up APR into multiple libraries, I had a  
>>> look through the current directories, and a first cut at how I'd  
>>> propose to split the code up would be:
...
>> What's the technical reason for that?
>> With the merging of apr and apr-util I was hoping
>> we would have to care only on a single library
>> and now there will be dozen of them. Scary.
>
> Yes - I think this is a little overboard, but must be balanced
> by the size of the code.

Right - but the primary motivation is as Ruediger says, to isolate 
dependencies, not to split by size.

w.r.t. size, I did this for the apr-trunk, which I think is a reasonable 
measure of code size across directories - for information...

$ for f in *; do \
   find $f -name \*.o | xargs ar cru ${f}.a && strip -g ${f}.a; \
  done
$ ls -1sk *.a | sort -n | tail -20
 16 uri.a
 20 hooks.a
 28 xml.a
 40 memory.a
 44 random.a
 44 tables.a
 48 ldap.a
 56 crypto.a
 56 memcache.a
 56 misc.a
 56 poll.a
 60 threadproc.a
 64 dbd.a
 68 locks.a
 72 dbm.a
 76 strings.a
 80 network_io.a
104 buckets.a
104 util-misc.a
120 file_io.a


Mime
View raw message