httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From r..@ai.mit.edu (Robert S. Thau)
Subject Re: I *don't* want Paul's style guide.
Date Mon, 01 Jul 1996 17:55:54 GMT
  I dunno... Ben seemed pretty far removed from the consensus. I think the
  "winner" should write it :)

Ummm... would that be you or Rasmus? ;-).

  >   /*
  >    * Multi-line comments look like this.  Make them real sentences.  Fill
  >    * them so they look like real paragraphs.
  >    */
  > 
  > /* My multi-line comments generally look like this.  Is there
  >  * any consensus on the above form?
  >  */

  I perfer the latter for short multi-line and the former for long
  multi-line.

I could live with that.

  > I'm not sure what a "major" structure is.  At any rate, when a
  > particular structure is used only by a given routine or set of
  > routines in one file, I think it is by far the best practice to put
  > the declaration with them, to keep it close to the use.  

  Hmm. This one I'm not so sure about. With the current Apache code, which
  follows this rule for the most part, it can get really annoying when you'd
  really like to call a function in http_protocol.c from a module, but you
  can't, because there's no header file that has it. I suppose on one hand
  it encourages writing code that would work on any Apache API-compatible
  server (not that there are others), but it can get annoying...

It isn't just "other Apache-compatible servers" --- it's future
versions of our own.  In particular, if any of the hard-core HTTP-NG
proposals, with binary-encoded requests and responses, rather than
RFC822-style headers, start to go places, we may want to change a lot
of the core innards to accomodate that --- particularly in
http_protocol.c, but also perhaps elsewhere.  That'll be easier if we
haven't exported any protocol-dependent functionality to the modules
in the meantime.

There may well be cases where something isn't supported and should be
--- if it's just a case of some silly string-twiddling routine which
people could just as easily write for themselves, the objections above
obviously don't apply.  But in general, the question of what to export
does require at least a little thought.

[ Other comments elided. ]

rst

Mime
View raw message