httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guenter Knauf <fua...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1466669 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Date Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:49:16 GMT
On 11.04.2013 15:06, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 04/11/2013 02:36 PM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
>> oh, and some more questions:
>> whats the benefit of having banner(), port() and started() as functions
>> (or methods)?
>> isnt it fine accessing these like f.e. r.filename?
>> r:put(r.banner) would be even shorter than r:put(r:banner()) ...
>>
>> and why is it:
>> r.module_info(module_name)
>> and not:
>> r:module_info(module_name)
>>
> I'll look into adding them as variables instead :)
ok.

> r.module_info is because it doesn't need the request_rec object to get
> module information (foo:bar(baz) is short for foo.bar(foo, baz) ).
ok.

> I admit, it can be a bit confusing, and perhaps we should consider
> turning it into r:module_info for the sake of conformity, but I don't
> consider it a bug or anything that would stall a backport.
I did ask a question as newbie, hoping you could quickly shed light into 
it, and you did; just wanted to be sure that it wasnt a thingy by 
acciedent ...
I did not consider this as a bug either.

Gün.


Mime
View raw message