apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm>
Subject Re: svn commit: r920017 - in /apr/apr/branches/1.4.x: ./ file_io/unix/open.c include/apr_file_io.h
Date Tue, 09 Mar 2010 11:43:01 GMT
On 08 Mar 2010, at 10:53 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:

>> Hmmm, the existing code follows this pattern, as below, and if we  
>> decide to
>> change the pattern then we need to change this behaviour throughout  
>> the rest
>> of the code, and probably the rest of APR too.
> For APR_FOPEN_NONBLOCK, if the caller asks for it but APR doesn't know
> how to implement it, should it succeed?  Would it possibly/definitely
> break the program to pretend success?
> (Maybe this isn't a practical concern -- no known platforms have this
> issue -- but other APR code supports multiple variations of the
> non-block flag.)

Hmmm - in that case it may make sense to drop the ifdef entirely, and  
if a unix platform is found to not support O_BLOCK, we can then make a  
call then as what to do. The ifdef could in theory be solving a  
problem we don't have.


View raw message