>>> On 10/11/2005 at 1:08:53 pm, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This isn't a vote, but a poll to gauge interest of the community. > > Moving forward into apr 2.x or beyond, which better espresses your > personal interest? > > [ X] Improve (al la apr_prealloc) the pool API, but continue to use > a pool-based schema for apr's resources. > > [ ] Add apr_Xalloc/_Xrealloc/_Xfree based on alternate allocation > strategies, allowing support of non-pool based apr resources. >
What more would the latter bring to the table that couldn't already be accomplished through malloc(), realloc() and free()? Brad
