apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: Lua co-routines
Date Sat, 26 Sep 2015 22:40:45 GMT

> On Sep 26, 2015, at 3:11 PM, Branko ─îibej <brane@apache.org> wrote:
> On 26.09.2015 19:10, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I've been keen on libmill, which provides a golang-like
>> goroutine library. It seems that such functionality would
>> be cool for APR and APR-based apps (like serf and httpd).
>> Then I started thinking: Lua also has a great coroutine impl
>> and it is also MIT licensed and might be easier to fold
>> into APR. Anyone ever look at that? Having something like
>> apr_routine() would be awful cool.
> Whilst I agree that co-routines are useful, I don't see a good reason to
> fold this into APR. I feel that APR has already departed far from its
> "portable runtime" promise. With database connectors and whatnot it's
> become a bit of a mastodont. We really should rethink what we're doing
> here; APR is no longer the "Apache (httpd) Portable Runtime", it's used
> by other projects that don't need all the luggage.
> And furthermore, it's not 1999 any more: the reasons why it was a good
> idea to bundle, e.g., an XML parser or a BerkeleyDB frontend into APR
> are no longer valid. I wish we'd pared APR-2.0 down to the basics of
> memory management, filsystem and I/O abstraction. We surely don't want
> to invent yet another coprocessing library.

Well, for APR2, I wouldn't mind looking into using pocore's
memory and hash/tables as our base. 

View raw message