httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexei Kosut <ako...@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject RE: errnos and buff.c
Date Thu, 17 Dec 1998 03:50:45 GMT
On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, RobS wrote:

[suggestions deleted]

> - buff.h suggests putting pointers to the basic I/O routines here in the
> BUFF struct.  I think this too would make BUFF more useful outside the core.
> I'd especially like to see start_chunk() and end_chunk() be a BUFF data
> member (CHUNK_HEADER_SIZE would have to be as well).

Yes, well... maybe, maybe not. My concern about adding additional
functionality to BUFF is that, in all the Apache 2.0 proposals I've seen,
BUFF is either removed or completely revamped. And given that Apache 1.3
doesn't itself need additional functionality, and it is not really the
task of the Apache Group to write a generally useful stream package (as if
there weren't enough written already), I don't quite see the point.

Further, as far as Apache is concerned, my opinion says that a module
developer should have less access to direct manipulation of the output and
input streams, not more. Although I can see the need for a
fully-functional file package contained within a module, for reading in
files or whatnot. It should be pointed out that there's nothing stopping
someone from linking sfio or bstdio or NSPR or whatnot in with their
module if it requires it. *shrug*

P.S. On an unrelated topic, I know I've been kinda quiet here lately; I've
been finishing up a fairly hectic quarter at school. But I'm on winter
break now, and I hope to get around to writing some code for some of my
Apache 2.0 ideas I've been spouting off about for the past six months.

-- Alexei Kosut <> <>
   Stanford University, Class of 2001 * Apache <> *

View raw message