"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>
>> Anyway, switching to APR is not that easy (IMO), if you want to take
>> advantage of ALL which is provided by APR (I'm deprecating ANSI-C here).
>
> This is an incremental process, and can only increase the stability of jk.
You'll see :) APR is nice, but I believe that, as it's wrong to write C++
code in Java, so it's wrong to "port" stuff to APR... Once you discover the
APR platform, if you want to take full advantage of it, you have to THINK
APR...
>>> Refactoring/cleaning of jk - one part will be done by the move to APR
>>> ( of course ), there are some optimizations and improvements in the jni
>>> connector I am planning ( also after APR is in ), and some of the webapp
>>> API ( and docs :-) could also help a lot.
>>
>> DOH! I'm saying, let's refactor WebApp how you guys want it... In the past 6
>> months I got to know APR quite well, on the other hand, you guys have more
>> experience on the different web-servers... We have a working APR-based
>> implementation, let's just put it together in a nice way so that it fits
>> BOTH needs...
>
> It doesn't make too much sense. You're saying we should use WebApp because
> it already uses APR, and port back all the protocols and modules to it.
I'm saying that, since in your previous messages you said you wanted to
"refactor" the JK api, and "port" it to APR, well, why not considering a new
planning ground?
The WebApp API at the moment is _so_ tiny that can be changed, revolted,
destroyed and rebuilt with no problems in a reasonable amount of time...
> I don't know - if using APR is so difficult that it's easier to port all
> the modules to webapp rather than replace the C functions with the APR
> equivalent in jk - then maybe we should thing again about using APR.
Your choice... Mine was to use APR as my "platform" forgetting everything I
knew about C...
> But my impression so far is that APR is quite easy to use and very close
> to the current abstractions used in jk.
You're welcome to go ahead and do whatever you want... I'm not vetoing (as
always)... I'm just being propositive...
Pier (the nice guy?)
