httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Bloom <...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: Letting Table store non-char data
Date Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:02:48 GMT
On Thursday 23 August 2001 07:45, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 09:03:21PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > On Wed, 2001-08-22 at 20:58, Greg Stein wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 03:59:56PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2001-08-22 at 15:41, Brian Pane wrote:
> > > > > Ian Holsman wrote:
> > > > > >On Wed, 2001-08-22 at 14:12, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > > > > >>We had binary tables, but we removed them, because that is
what
> > > > > >> hash tables are for.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >agreed.
> > > > > >but there are no hash tables on the request rec structure.
> > >
> > > Yes there is. apr_pool_userdata_set(..., r->pool)
> >
> > Thanks.
> > never knew about this function.
>
> I am switching my code to use pool userdata but wonder if swapping the
> parms make make the calling convention more consistent with the other
> pool methods that take the pool as first parm.
>
> - apr_status_t apr_pool_userdata_get(void **, char *, apr_pool_t *);
> + apr_status_t apr_pool_userdata_get(apr_pool_t *, char *, void **);
> #				      this ptr      attr    value

All of the APR functions take the pool as the last var.  This was due to a
communication gaffe when I first wrote APR, but it would be VERY painful
to change it now.

Ryan

______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies			rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------

Mime
View raw message