Le 19/05/2020 à 16:06, Tim Düsterhus a écrit :

Now back on topic. Instead of adding more parameters to set_var(), I'd
prefer a warning instead.

If someone is using set_var() from Lua, and that variable is never used
or set in the rest of the config, we would know that. Additionally, one
can set "zero-warning" option to prevent abuse by Lua scripts or to
prevent bugs.

This would break my use case for haproxy-auth-request. The plan is that
the Lua script unconditionally sets are variable for all response
headers and that HAProxy with my patches applied drops the variables
that are never going to be read. I specifically want to avoid that the
administrator needs to configure the headers to expose. Details are in:

I agree with Tim. It is pretty handy to let the set_var silently fail. This way, a script can expose many variables and let the user choose those he needs. The same is already done in the SPOE. Then, we've chosen to be backward compatible and let any variable be dynamically registered from LUA. There is a warning in the LUA documentation. It is now the developers responsibility to be careful. I doubt it will be a source of problems. But if so, it could be changed.

Christopher Faulet

Reply via email to