On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, Greg Stein wrote: > On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 09:15:06PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > In the APR-util include directory, we have two dbm headers, apr_sdbm.h and > > apr_dbm.h. The sdbm file is namespace protected with sdbm, instead of > > apr, and in my investigations, it looks like the apr_sdbm header is used > > by the apr_dbm.h header. Are we really exporting sdbm? If not, why is > > the sdbm header in the public include directory? > > I forget whether it was OtherBill or myself, but one of us pushed for > exporting sdbm explicitly [so it is present in the public dir]. Personally, > I'm quite cool with it being namespace protected, if that's what you're > after. > > apr_dbm is working well enough, that I think it would also be reasonable to > keep sdbm private. (but still namespace protected because the symbol names > "leak" from the library) > > Were you after a particular result?
I got an e-mail from somebody who was very confused about which one to use in his code. I would much prefer to just keep sdbm private. That is why we have apr_dbm.h. Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
