On Fri, 2003-01-31 at 12:34, Stas Bekman wrote:
> In mod_perl 1.0 Apache->request was always there. In 2.0 it's there only if
> it's configured to be there('PerlOptions +GlobalRequest' or 'SetHandler
> perl-script'). I believe that if I write a module that relies on
> Apache->request, I shouldn't test whether Apache->request has returned
> something or not, but let mod_perl handle that and croak if it's not
> available, because it's a user's configuration error. And I'd rather have
> mod_perl nicely hint what should be changed in order to get Apache->request
> work, than write my own verification and explanations.
>
> Remember that the code developed under mod_perl 1.0 relies on always having
> Apache->request, so people will have weird problems if we don't assert.
>
> Currently I've changed the code to assert, and let the user handle this.
> Developers can always trap the croak in eval {Apache->request} if they use
> this only as an optional functionality.+1 I think its a good way to do this > __________________________________________________________________ > Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker > http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com > http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Philippe M. Chiasson /gozer\@(cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/ 88C3A5A5 (122FF51B/C634E37B) http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ F9BF E0C2 480E 7680 1AE5 3631 CB32 A107 88C3 A5A5 Q: It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious. perl -e'$$=\${gozer};{$_=unpack(P7,pack(L,$$));/^JAm_pH\n$/&&print||$$++&&redo}'
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
