tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r562194 - in /tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk: native/common/jk_ajp13.h native/common/jk_ajp_common.c native/common/jk_lb_worker.c xdocs/miscellaneous/changelog.xml xdocs/reference/workers.xml
Date Wed, 08 Aug 2007 16:25:29 GMT
:)

It just seemed like a conscious coding style and didn't want
to confuse things...

Or else it was some normal C array/pointer confusion :)
*duck*

On Aug 8, 2007, at 12:09 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:

> You are missing nothing. Feel free to scratch :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Rainer
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> On Aug 2, 2007, at 4:29 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
>>> And in fact it doesn't matter. I found it more logical, to have  
>>> JK_STATUS_ERROR and JK_STATUS_FATAL_ERROR closer together (for  
>>> those reading the code). The constants are not used outside JK,  
>>> so there is no compatibility problem.
>>>
>>> It looks like your are closely following todays JK changes. I  
>>> really appreciate that! Unless you find problems, I just now  
>>> commited my last change (hopefully) for 1.2.25.
>> A other little nit: The see a few places where
>> we have things like (in jk_lb_worker.c for example):
>>    &(p->lb_workers[0].s->route[0])
>> Can't they simply be reduced to
>>    p->lb_workers[0].s->route
>> ?
>> Not exactly sure what I'm missing there...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>


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


Mime
View raw message