httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From HyperHacker <hyperhac...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Reducing number of mod_lua hook directives
Date Tue, 11 May 2010 16:55:25 GMT
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 08:47, Dan Poirier <poirier@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2010-05-11 at 08:52, Dan Poirier <poirier@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2010-05-10 at 16:03, "William A. Rowe Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>>> On 5/10/2010 2:25 PM, Brian McCallister wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>> LuaHook AccessChecker /path/to/script.lua  funcname
>>>>> LuaHook AuthChecker   /path/to/script.lua  funcname
>>>>> LuaHook CheckUserID   /path/to/script.lua  funcname
>>>
>>> Any reason not to name the func before the script, especially since path names
>>> can get long winded, and I'm thinking C like decl funcname(args) {script}
>>
>> So we'd have
>>
>> LuaHook AccessChecker funcname /path/to/script.lua
>> <LuaHook AccessChecker funcname>
>
>
> I just thought of a problem - right now, the funcname is optional
> (defaults to "handle").  I hate having optional arguments that don't
> come at the end.  I'd just as soon make it a required argument, but if
> people would rather it stay optional, then I'd rather leave it at the
> end.   What do folks prefer?
>
> Dan
>

I'd go for making it required, but is there a reason you have to
specify a function? Lua scripts usually start executing from the first
line in the file. It seems to me to make more sense to do that if a
function is not specified (or is "-" if it's a required argument).

-- 
Sent from my toaster.

Mime
View raw message