httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David Reid" <dr...@jetnet.co.uk>
Subject Re: Apache 2.0 alpha. (again) :)
Date Tue, 21 Mar 2000 09:39:12 GMT
Greg,

Agreed but we need to be careful.  mm presently only works on Unix & BeOS.
OS/2 has it's own implementation and so probably will windows, so APR makes
sense for these, no?

If something is non-specific and works out of the box on all platforms then
I see no need to add it to APR and having it as a separate library is a
better solution.  We just need to look at them when they are suggested.

david

> 2) functions which use no OS facilities and are (therefore) inherently
>    portable.
>
>
> When APR was started, I believed it to be #1 only. The other utility
> functions are just that -- utilities. They don't serve to make programs
> more portable. All you're providing is packaging, not portability.
>
> Rather than see APR become a big bag of unfocused bits, I'd rather see it
> become stuff to make things portable. The "general" stuff should go into
> its own package and compete on merits against things like mhash, mm, glib
> (not to be confused with glibc), and similar libraries/toolsets.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> --
> Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
>
>


Mime
View raw message