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: deprecated attribute? / naming
Date Mon, 07 Feb 2005 15:52:41 GMT
At 03:20 PM 2/6/2005, Max Kellermann wrote:
>On 2005/02/06 21:56, Joe Schaefer <joe+gmane@sunstarsys.com> wrote:
>> Given the amount of changes, I think that's a very good idea.  So
>> anything we mark in 2.05-dev as deprecated will mean that we're
>> planning to remove these items in the 2.06 (non-developer) release,
>> ok?
>
>+1
>
>A little bit about names..
>
>I noticed you deprecated "apreq_cookie()" and replaced it by
>"apreq_jar_get()". "jar" used to be the name for the class which
>collects cookies. I would rather drop the name "jar" now in favor of
>"cookie":
>
> apr_status_t (*cookies)(apreq_env_handle_t *, const apr_table_t **);
> apreq_cookie_t *(*cookie_get)(apreq_env_handle_t *, const char *);
>
>When we're discussing the function names in apreq_env.h, what do you
>think about the following renames:
>
> apreq_args_get -> apreq_get_arg
> apreq_jar_get -> apreq_get_cookie
>
>I'm unsure about how "apreq_body_get" could fit into that
>scheme. "apreq_get_body" somehow conflicts with "apreq_body" because
>both contain the singular form of "body".

At least APR has adopted the lib_function_verb() form, at some
small insistence from the modperl community.  It has the very
nice artifact of devolving to class lib_function->verb() when
abstracted.

I'd prefer we not start backtracking twords lib_verb_function().

Bill



Mime
View raw message