> On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Bill Stoddard wrote: > > > I am teetering on a -1 for this patch. You are hacking around a more > > fundamental problem. If we cannot fix problems like this w/o impacting > > the performance of all applications that need to read files, then APR > > is seriously broken. > > Well, that's probably true. But please don't -1 the patch. If you're > going to -1 something, -1 APR's lack of an apr_file_read()-like function > that takes an offset as a parameter. Until APR has such a beast (which > will just have to do the lock and seek on its own), this is the correct > patch to the buckets, which are broken without it. >
We routinely veto short term hacks in favor of fixing the problem the right way (I've had a few of my own hacks vetoed and rightfully so :-). The problem with allowing hacks like this in is that they tend to accumulate and the proper fix never gets implemented. Bill
