Aaargh, just accidentally sent this to Chris instead of list. /me grumbles about missing Reply-To headers.
> On 18 May 2010, at 23:14, Chris Knight wrote: > >> +/** >> + * Redefines the function used by this apr_allocator to allocate a block of >> memory. >> + * @param allocator The allocator to set the memory allocation functions on >> + * @param alloc_fn The function for me to call when apr_allocator_alloc is >> called >> + * @param free_fn The function for me to call when apr_allocator_free is >> called >> + * @param opaque The opaque information to pass to these back-end functions >> + */ >> +typedef apr_memnode_t *(apr_allocator_alloc_fn_t)(apr_size_t size, void >> *opaque); >> +typedef void(apr_allocator_free_fn_t)(apr_memnode_t *memnode, void *opaque); >> +APR_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_allocator_set_fns(apr_allocator_t *allocator, >> apr_allocator_alloc_fn_t *alloc_fn, apr_allocator_free_fn_t *free_fn, void >> *opaque); > > Nice little generalisation! > > At what point do you call apr_allocator_set_fns? I'd guess just after the > pool > has been created, right? Any reason not to integrate it into pool creation > by passing it optional allocator fns? > > -- > Nick Kew
