httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <...@algroup.co.uk>
Subject Re: index.html not served w/mod_autoindex active
Date Sun, 07 Jan 2001 21:39:29 GMT
Jon Travis wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 09:11:12PM +0000, Ben Laurie wrote:
> > Jon Travis wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 05:50:21PM +0000, Ben Laurie wrote:
> > > > rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Do not consider this a veto in any way shape or form, this
is an opinion,
> > > > > > > that we shouldn't have to call every handler.  Please implement
whatever
> > > > > > > solution you like best.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since no-one else has expressed an opinion, I shall. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Cool.  I look forward to seeing it.  :-)  I am sorry that I held
things up
> > > > > this long.  I didn't realize that I was the bottleneck.  If I had,
I would
> > > > > have gotten out of the way much sooner.  :-)
> > > >
> > > > Don't sweat it - I didn't have time to do it any sooner, anyway!
> > >
> > > I hope this is the correct thread to respond on this to, so here goes:
> > >
> > > I just saw the commits which were made to hookize the handlers.  I have
> > > a few comments:
> > >
> > >     1 - AP_DECLARE_HOOK for the handler should probably not be in http_config.h
> > >         It should probably be in http_request.h
> >
> > Probably correct.
> >
> > >     2 - A new hook prototype has been made.  One that takes the handlername,
and
> > >         the request.  This sucks.  Since the handler information is gleaned
> > >         from the request anyway, why not keep the old prototype for the
> > >         handler, and make the registered hook use some function to grab the
> > >         handler from the request_rec?
> >
> > Because then it has to be done every time, which is inefficient. Why
> > does it suck?
> 
> Because it makes me have to write more code.. ;-)  mod_snake handles all
> the request_rec based handlers in a same generic way.  By changing the
> prototype of this function you kinda break that.. :-(

Ah.

>  You are doing it
> everytime in ap_invoke_handler anyway, so the only inneficiency is that
> introduced is an extra function call.

What?

>  And if you wanted, you could add
> another field to the request_rec, and just manipulate that within
> your ap_invoke_handler routine, or whatever.   That would save the
> overhead of the function call.

I could by that. Makes it less clear how you get from A to B, but I'm
not that fussed. OTOH, request_rec _already_ has handler:

    /** The handler string that we use to call a handler function */
    const char *handler;	/* What we *really* dispatch on           */

the comments are a complete lie, of course. I don't know whether we can
fix them without breaking stuff.

Cheers,

Ben.

--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html

"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff

Mime
View raw message