Date: Sat, 27 Nov 1999 02:33:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: apache-1.3/src/modules/standard mod_rewrite.c
In-Reply-To: <19991127104256.A30219@engelschall.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9911270229560.18236-100000@nebula.lyra.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

On Sat, 27 Nov 1999, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
>...
> Yeah, you're right. I've tried now both the old complicated function and the
> new one and both are fine. Hmmmm... nevertheless I'm really wondering what the
> reason was that I wrote the function in a such a complicated way for
> mod_rewrite (I had it in the simpler form originally). It was certainly not
> just for fun (because I hate such ugly fiddling myself). So, there _had to be_
> a good reason in the past. Too bad that this was already years ago and at a
> time where mod_rewrite was not staying in CVS. But I no longer can remember,
> so let's see what happens... if it fails, we can revert it again to the ugly
> form, of course.  Thanks for your efforts, Greg.

Did you possibly need both integer and string forms at one point? I can
easily see using the printf if you needed a string. I couldn't see a
reason for it either :-), but figured it was there for some (historical)
reason. Best I came up with, was string variables or somesuch.

Cheers,
-g

p.s. I'm assuming the policy is to not patch 2.0 at the same time, since
we'll probably want to do a sweep of all changes since the last tag (and
haphazardly patching one or two things over would make that job tougher)

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/