In a message dated 01-09-15 17:09:50 EDT, Jon wrote...
> On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:21:38PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > In a message dated 01-09-15 15:44:43 EDT, Ian wrote...
> >
> > Coments on coments ( my2c )...
> >
> > > additional comments (my 2c)
> >
> > > * Caching should be removed (there is another caching module there
> > > it should use that), failing that, maybe it should be split out to
> > > a different filter
> >
> > What caching are you talking about?
> > This version isn't attempting to have a compressed object cache (yet).
> >
> > > * functions should be static
> >
> > Whatever.
>
> That was a useful comment -- why the poor response?
It wasn't a 'poor' response... just a quick one. I'm very busy today.
Translation:
Whatever: You may be right. Do whatever you think is best.
> > > * why are you defining your own strncmp??
> >
> > Faster and guaranteed thread-safe using pointers only.
>
> Faster than what? I just tested your strncmp vs. the strncmp in
> my libc (glibc 2.2), and the one in glibc runs 10% faster than
> yours.
Then just use whatever you like.
Try same test under Win32 or DOS, however.
YMMV.
> In addition, your strncmp is less useful (only returns 1
> or 0, instead of -1, 0, or 1 [useful in sorting, etc.]), and isn't
> really a true replacement for strncmp
Never said it was. It just does what needs to be done for
the module that uses it.
> as foo/bar == foo\bar in
> your strncmp, where the same is not true in libc's strncmp. I don't
> know of any strncmps out there which are not thread safe --
I do.
See wireless platforms and look VERY closely at Win32.
ASIDE: A lot of the code that is there came from other platforms
that we work with here ( wireless, embedded chip stuff, etc ).
The original coding of the pointer-based string stuff in mod_gzip
was for a platform that not only doesn't even have any 'strxxx()'
functions... it has no STDLIB at all.
If you don't like what you see... just fire up the search and
replace keys and it's over in about 2 seconds.
No big whoop.
What is there WORKS and has been TESTED.
That's all I have to say about 'string' stuff.
> and besides,
> if there are some, then Apache is screwed on those platforms anyway.
Probably so.
> I'll keep my other comments to myself.
> -- Jon
Oh... don't tease!
ROFL ( Really... I'm trying to keep this light as it should be ).
Yours...
Kevin
