Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Garrett Rooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
on lines 278 and 283 you replace put with pupt for apr_os_exp_time_put
and apr_os_thread_put. i assume that's wrong, since i can't for the
life of me figure out what pupt would mean ;-)
good for you
if
On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
+1 a.s.a.p.
ok, i'm planning todo it later this evening.
to see the files that will change and the line number/name change:
http://perl.apache.org/~dougm/apr_rename.txt
feel free to shout if anything looks wrong, i won't commit for a few
hours.
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
+1. Wow that looks great. A toast to consistency!
i'll drink to that :)
Is there any way you could forward along the conversion script that you
used (Or is that the one you sent last week)? This is going to break
Subversion a bit, and maybe I
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 10:59:47PM -0800, Doug MacEachern wrote:
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
+1. Wow that looks great. A toast to consistency!
i'll drink to that :)
Is there any way you could forward along the conversion script that you
used (Or is that the one you
On Thursday, February 8, 2001, at 12:59 AM, Doug MacEachern wrote:
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
+1. Wow that looks great. A toast to consistency!
i'll drink to that :)
Is there any way you could forward along the conversion script that you
used (Or is that the one you sent last
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Garrett Rooney wrote:
on lines 278 and 283 you replace put with pupt for apr_os_exp_time_put
and apr_os_thread_put. i assume that's wrong, since i can't for the
life of me figure out what pupt would mean ;-)
whoops! you're right, i'll fix that and pupt the changes back
Garrett Rooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
on lines 278 and 283 you replace put with pupt for apr_os_exp_time_put
and apr_os_thread_put. i assume that's wrong, since i can't for the
life of me figure out what pupt would mean ;-)
good for you
if sleeping child cooperates I'll fix it up Real
On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 03:05:30PM -0800, Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 09:38:16AM -0500, Kevin Pilch-Bisson wrote:
...
+1 for this, but only if it is done soon. As Ryan said recently, APR is
approaching the Beta stage, so API's shouldn't change much. However, I
think this is
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 06:50:09AM -0500, Kevin Pilch-Bisson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 03:05:30PM -0800, Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 09:38:16AM -0500, Kevin Pilch-Bisson wrote:
...
+1 for this, but only if it is done soon. As Ryan said recently, APR is
approaching
PROTECTED]
To: dev@apr.apache.org
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:21 PM
Subject: apr_ function prefixes
there's a number of places where apr (and httpd) is not consistent with
prefixes or doesn't use one at all (beyond apr_ or ap_).
personally, i like to see functions named with the prefix
On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 09:21:55PM -0800, Doug MacEachern wrote:
there's a number of places where apr (and httpd) is not consistent with
prefixes or doesn't use one at all (beyond apr_ or ap_).
personally, i like to see functions named with the prefix of the base type
(struct) they operate on
12 matches
Mail list logo
