Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-perl-dev-archive@perl.apache.org Received: (qmail 57708 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jun 2003 07:35:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@perl.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@perl.apache.org Received: (qmail 57665 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2003 07:35:14 -0000 Received: from erato.logilune.com (HELO mail.logilune.com) (195.154.174.52) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 07:35:14 -0000 Received: from stason.org (localhost.logilune.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.logilune.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C34278D4A for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 09:35:25 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <3EDC4FB0.3070201@stason.org> Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 17:35:12 +1000 From: Stas Bekman Organization: Hope, Humanized User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@perl.apache.org Subject: VOID => RUN_ALL or what? 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 [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