httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.C...@Golux.Com>
Subject Re: vetoing hide.h
Date Wed, 01 Apr 1998 03:47:10 GMT
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> 
> I think it would help keep the conversation civil if folks made the
> distinction between what the "ideal" solution is, what they want, and what
> would be acceptable to them.  My hope is that the above is at least
> acceptable to everyone.

Right-ho.  For me, the ideal solution is to a) decide on a nomenclature,
and then b) modify the symbols and their references into accordance.
If that means changing all the "palloc" calls to "mumble_palloc", then
that's what it takes.  I consider this the probable Right Thing.

But that isn't going to happen before 2.0.

So for a short-term solution, I'd like to see all of the symbols
given an (hopefully) Apache-specific prefix to avoid any collisions.
As Rasmus (I think) pointed out, even though we only know of three
now, there are probably others awaiting us - so namespace *all*
of the symbols now.  Something like hide.h does this without
requiring massive code changes, and it can be toggled, too.  Something
that accomplishes the same end would be acceptable - I'm not in
a "hide.h or else" stance.

Setting something up so that module writers or other hackers can
encounter a collision, and have to twiddle some file to deal with
that single symbol, I consider highly sub-optimal.

Note that I am backing off entirely on the idea of overloading
hide.h into a give-the-symbols-meaningful-prefixes function.

#ken	P-)}

Ken Coar                    <http://Web.Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Group member         <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://WWW.Dummies.Com/

Mime
View raw message