httpd-apreq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <joe+gm...@sunstarsys.com>
Subject Re: [PATCH] first snapshot of my "let's kill void*env" patch
Date Sun, 09 Jan 2005 23:58:30 GMT
Max Kellermann <max@duempel.org> writes:

[...]

> What about:
> - apreq_env_t -> apreq_env_class_t
> - void*env [apreq_handle_t in my patch] -> apreq_env_handle_t
>
> .. and the variables of type apreq_handle_t are called "env" (instead
> of "handle" in my first patch). That would leave the variable name
> "env" consistently where it is now; apreq_env_class_t should be hidden
> inside apreq anyway, visible only to the core and to the env classes
> itself.

I like that.

> Should the cgi env class move to env/ ?

That's where it started (env/libapreq_cgi.a), but we moved it into 
src/ to provide a "default" environment (and IIRC skirt some WinFU
problems we were having trouble with).  Here's the original proposal

    http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apreq-dev&m=106704897231077&w=2

> Sounds evident to me, but it should be linked into libapreq.so, is
> that ok? Or is the env/ directory only for "external" env modules like
> mod_apreq?

If we don't want the library to provide a default, we should move the
cgi env back to env/.  But I don't see that as a positive thing just yet.

-- 
Joe Schaefer

Mime
View raw message