httpd-apreq-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: apreq-2 uploads as bucket brigades?
Date Wed, 22 Jan 2003 01:01:24 GMT
At 06:24 PM 1/21/2003, Stas Bekman wrote:
>Joe Schaefer wrote:
>
>>>FILE*'s can be passed to Tcl to create new file handles, and this is
>>>something that I feel is useful, because it gives you a really simple
>>>API for dealing with smaller files, even if it's not terribly
>>>efficient.
>>
>>It is useful, natural, and convenient.  I'd just like to avoid making it mandatory
like we did with apreq-1.  XForms will present a new set of needs for our mfd parser, and
the extra flexibility of brigades over
>>a vanilla FILE* pointer could be a really big winner there.
>
>Though it's not crossplatform. That's why apr is using apr_file_t and provides the method
to extract the native implementation (FILE/HANDLE/...). I believe we should be using apr_file_t
and not FILE*.

I would agree (as an apr hack.)

Can I suggest you also consider the benefit of a custom bucket type?
It might be possible to support the seek/read/write model against the
set-aside file while still supporting the brigade read.  This *could* be
a very happy compromise.

I can't go into it tonight (trying to get the Win9X users on 2.0.44
unbroken) but I'd be happy to share some more thoughts on this
later in the week.

Bill



Mime
View raw message