httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <...@algroup.co.uk>
Subject Re: Naming conventions for 2.* (and maybe 1.3+?)
Date Sun, 25 Jan 1998 11:54:31 GMT
Alexei Kosut wrote:
> > Why?  It's a level of abstraction, and the name indicates that the
> > routine [potentially] does OS-specific things.  The name's the
> > same, the purpose likewise, but it's a black box with different
> > innards on a per-OS basis.
> 
> Um, no. I'm talking about the prefix of os_. How is os_* different from
> ap_*? I mean, standalone_main() does very different things depending on
> the OS, but I don't see anyone clamboring to add an os_ prefix to it.

Perhaps we should. The point of os_ was, to me, to delineate those parts
that may have to be rewritten according to the platform. I think that is
a useful distinction. And, yes, it may lead to us having to rename
things as we progress.

Cheers,

Ben.

-- 
Ben Laurie            |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686|Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant  |Fax:   +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org
and Technical Director|Email: ben@algroup.co.uk |Apache-SSL author
A.L. Digital Ltd,     |http://www.algroup.co.uk/Apache-SSL
London, England.      |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache

Mime
View raw message