On 21.11.2015 09:31, Graham Leggett wrote: > On 21 Nov 2015, at 12:11 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > >> Any objections to picking this up for APR 1.next/2.0? >> >> It seems that httpd isn't the only one who wants to be strict about >> case-insensitive token string recognition, and non-POSIX char case >> gets weird quickly. > +1 to this. > > Ideally we should add it to APR, and then provide a convenience function in > httpd that has the same implementation when the function in APR is missing, > and use the APR function when present.
Does it matter that this implementation assumes that the runtime encoding is a superset of ASCII? (FWIW, it doesn't even handle the Unicode Latin-1 range). -- Brane
