httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Kraemer <>
Subject Re: vetoing hide.h
Date Tue, 31 Mar 1998 12:25:56 GMT
On Tue, Mar 31, 1998 at 08:02:58AM -0500, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Not to me.  Removing the excess baggage that's been added to HIDE's
> purpose (and I'm one of the guiltiest parties), it is still needed
> to avoid name collisions.  Why on Earth would you want that not to
> be the default?

Because I've stumbled over it when I created the ctags(1) 'tags' files.
(My editor would always jump at 'hide.h' instead of the place where the
functions reside).

Because I stumbled over it again when I tried to track down CONNECT
problems in the debugger and had to enter each and every "stop at"
command twice. Once with/without AP_ prefix, and then a second time with
the "correct" name.

Because we don't even have a written-down API (that's what others
referred to: ISAPI V1 being upwards compatible with V3+). Without an
exact definition of the functions and their names, of what use is the
hide functionality when we don't even have a defined interface, and what
we cling to is a moving target like it used to be?

Granted, the PHP clashes were resolved fine (and I've had a
  #define strcasecmp ap_strcasecmp
  #define strncasecmp ap_strncasecmp
in my conf.h for ages to avoid PHP2's problems with apache).

| S I E M E N S |  <>  |      Siemens Nixdorf
| ------------- |   Voice: +49-89-636-46021     |  Informationssysteme AG
| N I X D O R F |   FAX:   +49-89-636-44994     |   81730 Munich, Germany
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~My opinions only, of course; pgp key available on request

View raw message