On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 06:58:11PM +, Phil Endecott wrote:
Thanks for the replies. The patch to ap_config.h that Joe Orton posted
is reported to fix the problem. Can this be included in the next release?
Thanks for testing it out, this has been proposed for inclusion in the
2.2.x
Thanks for the replies. The patch to ap_config.h that Joe Orton posted
is reported to fix the problem. Can this be included in the next release?
Cheers,
--Phil.
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 09:12:07PM +, Phil Endecott wrote:
I'm the author of Anyterm (http://anyterm.org), which includes an Apache
module. Although I haven't yet tried to compile it for Apache 2.2 some
of my users have, and they're having problems. See
Dear All,
I'm the author of Anyterm (http://anyterm.org), which includes an Apache
module. Although I haven't yet tried to compile it for Apache 2.2 some
of my users have, and they're having problems. See
http://anyterm.org/forums/viewtopic.php?pid=768#p768. It looks as if
the definition
Phil Endecott wrote:
# define AP_INIT_TAKE1(directive, func, mconfig, where, help) \
{ directive, { .take1=func }, mconfig, where, TAKE1, help }
That {.take1=func} syntax was a new one on me. A quick test suggests
that it is legal in C but not in C++, and I compile my module with g++.
On 12/8/05, Brandon Fosdick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, I've never seen that syntax before either.
That's C99 syntax. Older compilers, and C++ compilers, don't
generally support it.
-garrett
On Thursday 08 December 2005 21:12, Phil Endecott wrote:
[AP_INIT incompatible with C++ in 2.2]
Joe had a suggestion about that, but noone followed up on it.
IMO it would be worth fixing if someone had a round tuit, but
I don't see it as a priority job.
* Garrett Rooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/8/05, Brandon Fosdick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, I've never seen that syntax before either.
That's C99 syntax. Older compilers, and C++ compilers, don't
generally support it.
Then we should throw it away. We are supposed to support
