httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Manoj Kasichainula <ma...@io.com>
Subject Re: ap_ vs apr_
Date Tue, 01 Aug 2000 10:14:05 GMT
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 12:40:55AM -0700, Doug MacEachern wrote:
> true.  but regardless of the binary compat issue, i can see lots of use
> for libapr outside of httpd, i like to see the separation of namespace.
> i don't know what other reasons came out of the older discussion.

The basic reason that I remember for sticking with ap_ what that it
reduced confusion; you don't have to remember whether a function was
an ap_ or an apr_ function. Also, the namespaces shouldn't be
seperate, because it would get very confusing to have both ap_blah and
apr_blah in the source tree.

Now, I personally preferred apr_, mainly because switching from two
namespaces to one is easy, while switching later from one to two is
harder.

But, I think it's a bad thing to have all these functions changing
names every few months on a whim.

> % ls -l diff.txt 
> -rw-r--r--   1 dougm    users     1249609 Aug  1 00:06 diff.txt
> 
> so, one last chance for anyone to veto this change, otherwise i'll commit
> late tommorrow night.

-1 (with no veto, though I did consider it), for the reason I stated
above. I'd prefer to see someone who was pro-ap_ say that he has
changed his mind; otherwise we're just switching because certain
people aren't paying attention at the moment.


Mime
View raw message