Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 31009 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2001 19:20:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 30996 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2001 19:20:26 -0000 Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 11:23:58 -0800 (PST) From: rbb@covalent.net X-Sender: rbb@koj To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: APR - part 2 In-Reply-To: <3A574F8C.93064D29@level8.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N > Hiya, > I've a second APR related question. Some of the external prototypes use > APR_DECLARE(foo_t) and others do not. Notably apr_create_pool() has no such declaration > wheras apr_destroy_pool() does. Is this an oversight or is there a reason for the mix ?? It is a major oversight. The problem is that Unix doesn't tend to need those things, so when APR was originally written, they were forgotten. As we find them, we try to fix them, but we have had bigger issues on our plate recently. Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------