Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 58439 invoked by uid 500); 7 Dec 2001 18:55:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 58426 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 18:55:13 -0000 Message-ID: <3C11106B.2010803@cnet.com> Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 10:54:35 -0800 From: Brian Pane User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011011 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@httpd.apache.org CC: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 ROADMAP References: <1007750658.14821.53.camel@griffon.nasa.cnet.cnwk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Ian Holsman wrote: >On Fri, 2001-12-07 at 10:39, Sander Striker wrote: > ... >>In subversion svn_string_t was introduced, because it wasn't in APR. >>It does (AFAIK) exactly what brian describes. >> >is there any reason NOT to introduce this into the APR now? >we could then slowly migrate strings to this > I'm in favor of including it in APR, but opposed to trying to retrofit it into Apache before 2.0 GA. My rationale for this is that, even with a reference-counted string class, we'll have to be extremely careful not to make performance worse when doing a major change in the string handling. (And we're close to having all the really significant strlen and strdup inefficiencies fixed in httpd-2.0 already.) --Brian