Hi Guys,
I last brought this up a little over a year ago and other priorities
intervened but I have now implemented an "apache_table" command and I
want to get y'alls' feedback on it.
apache_table as currently implemented provides read/write access to
four tables in Apache: notes, headers_in, headers_out,
err_headers_out and subprocess_env.
Here's the syntax of the command:
apache_table get tableName key
returns the value of the specified key or an empty string
apache_table set tableName keyValueList
apache_table set tableName key value
In the first case, takes zero or more key-value pairs in keyValueList
and sets each key in the table with its corresponding value.
In the second case, takes one key and one value and sets that key and
value into the specified table.
apache_table unset tableName key
Unsets the specified key-value pair from the table. It is not an
error to unset a key that doesn't exist.
apache_table names tableName
Returns a list of all the keys in the specified table.
apache_table array_get tableName
Returns the key-value pairs of the specified table as a list,
suitable for array set. For instance:
array set notes [apache_table array_get notes]
apache_table clear tableName
Invokes apr_table_clear to clear the contents of the specfied table.
I think the above syntax is pretty reasonable. The part that's
questionable is providing access to headers_in, headers_out,
err_headers_out and subprocess_env. I know we already have a
mechanism for access to subprocess_env and would be more than willing
to remove any or all of these, or potentially add access to other
tables, although I'm not aware of other tables that would be candidates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscr...@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-h...@tcl.apache.org