httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>
Subject Re: LuaSet: good or terrible idea?
Date Wed, 25 Jul 2012 01:36:56 GMT


Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Dear dev@,
> I've been looking into mod_lua for some time now, and have created an
> external library with lot of functions that make use of the AP/APR C API
> (such as ap_expr calls, scoreboard reading, sha1/md5/b64 functions, dbd
> and sendfile support etc). While doing so, I've also thought about how
> to improve mod_lua itself, but I now find myself doubting my own
> reasoning for committing a directive to the code.
> 
> The directive would/could be called LuaSet, and would set a variable
> that is only accessible through Lua, much like mod_perl has PerlSetVar,
> and mod_php has...whatever it has. The idea was that you could do
> something like:
> 
> LuaSet foo on
> <Location /nothere>
>   LuaSet foo off
> </Location>
> 
> and then retrieve that value inside your Lua scripts using something
> like r:parseenv() to get a table of Lua-specific values that applied to
> that scope.
> 
> However, this could also be managed by using SetEnv or SetEnvIf (if you
> hook something real early) and then fetched through r.subprocess_env. So
> the question is; Should I bother committing this directive, or is it
> just a redundant function?
> 
> On the plus side, it makes it easy in the configuration to spot Lua
> specific values and ensures that it doesn't clash with other env
> variables that might have been set, and on the other hand, one could
> just do something like SetEnv Lua_foo on.
> 
> So what say you, is it a good or a terribly redundant idea?
> 

IMHO there should be no Lua specific directive if setenv / setenvif can do the same.

Regards

RĂ¼diger

Mime
View raw message