Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
>
> Your editor seems to have been tab-happy.
Most likely... There is one true indent :)
> Would it be better to simplify as:
>
> ap_register_cleanup_ex(p, (void *) (long) fd, fd_cleanup, fd_cleanup,
> domagic ? fd_magic_cleanup : NULL);
>
I considered that, (in addition to having the else call the non-ex)
and can't recall why I decided against it (I think it was some feedback)
but it's certainly my preference.
> (Appears several other places, too.)
>
> > API_EXPORT(void) ap_kill_cleanups_for_socket(pool *p, int sock)
> > @@ -2603,19 +2681,19 @@
> >
> > if (pipe_out) {
> > *pipe_out = ap_bcreate(p, B_RD);
> > - ap_note_cleanups_for_fd(p, fd_out);
> > + ap_note_cleanups_for_fd_ex(p, fd_out, 0);
>
> Why switch this? Wouldn't it have been the same thing, or are you
> trying to save extra function calls whereever possible? -- justin
>
Actually, I anticipate that this will be one (of many) areas where
we use the _ex function, and so thought a simple s/0/1/ would
happen soon after the commit :)
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
