httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject RE: apr_send using const char instead of void ??
Date Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:37:49 GMT
> From: Gregory Nicholls [mailto:gnicholls@level8.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 7:29 AM
> 
>  By length calculations are you referring to sizeof() ??
>     G.

I doubt it... he's discussing pointer arithmetic (if I'm clear):

void *p, *q;
p = strchr (q, '?');
return p - q;

... is an invalid construct, since the 'size' of p and q are
undefined.

> Tony Finch wrote:
> 
> > Jeff Trawick <trawickj@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > >Gregory Nicholls <gnicholls@level8.com> writes:
> > >
> > >>     Question: The prototype for function apr_send uses a 
> const char * as it's
> > >> buffer parm type. Is there a reason that this isn't a 
> void * ??? I mean I know I
> > >> can cast it but I'm wondering if there's something I 
> don't understand.
> > >
> > >"const void *" sounds better to me, too.
> >
> > A reason in favour of char* is that length calculations on void
> > pointers are forbidden. If the latter were not true I'd be in favour
> > of void* too, but then void* would effectively be no different from
> > char*.

I'd also point out that everything we are sending up or down is
octet data, so char* is entirely appropriate.  Even utf-7/utf-8
are octet streams.

Mime
View raw message