httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Bloom <...@raleigh.ibm.com>
Subject Re: apr_ v.s. ap_
Date Fri, 07 May 1999 16:13:39 GMT

> It would be great to have apr_thread_, apr_io_, apr_mutex_ prefixes
> ( with the prefix acting as a "package name").

Although we do no use the apr_(package name) convention, IMHO, it is very
easy to determine which package is being referenced by the function.  Most
of them have some reference to the package.  i.e. ap(r)_procattr_*,
ap(r)_socket_create

> 
> ( don't forget - there are 100+ functions, little documentation, and of
> course you know all of them, but for people with less experience it's not
> so easy, and at least apr_ was a help)

The documentation for the apr library functions is actually quite
complete.  Everytime a function is written, it is fully documented, so
when an actual release is made, hopefully the documentation issue for apr
will go away.

Ryan


_______________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom		rbb@raleigh.ibm.com
4205 S Miami Blvd	
RTP, NC 27709		It's a beautiful sight to see good dancers 
			doing simple steps.  It's a painful sight to
			see beginners doing complicated patterns.	


Mime
View raw message