perl-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stas Bekman <s...@stason.org>
Subject VOID => RUN_ALL or what?
Date Tue, 03 Jun 2003 07:35:12 GMT
[moving this issue to a separate thread]


 >> What about
 >> http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/user/handlers/intro.html#item_VOID
 >>
 >> Now we say:
 >>
 >> "Handlers of the type VOID will be all executed in the order they have
 >> been registered disregarding their return values. Though in mod_perl
 >> they are expected to return Apache::OK."
 >>
 >> Should we simply call them RUN_ALL?
 >
 >
 > yeah.  my thought was that this only affected the RUN_FIRST handlers.
 > all others should iterate through the stack until finished or error.

Yes. that was a side question, not strictly related to your proposal.

It just strikes me odd where we have: this handler if of type VOID, but in 
mod_perl we expect it to return Apache::OK. While we are changing this stacked 
handlers behavior, may be we should also decide on this one.

So I see two choices:

1. s/VOID/RUN_ALL/ in the docs

2. fix the code to ignore return values for VOID types and remove the doc 
comment of "we expect VOID handlers to return Apache::OK nevertheless"

I believe the second choice is the correct one. Since it really follows the 
Apache spec.

__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman            JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/     mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org


Mime
View raw message