The other way (and I'm not suggesting we'd want to do this) would be to generate the file. GLib does something similar. Basically it means we'd end up with a platform specific apr_private.h with no platform specific code sections as the whole thing would be platform specific. Whether this is worth the effort I'm not sure though!
david ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Greg Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 2:23 PM Subject: Re: apr_portable.h > > Because the point of apr_portable is to provide the portability > functions. It is named that, because the apr_get_os_foo and > apr_set_os_foo calls are used to make sure that APR can be used with > non-APR programs, and those have always been referred to as portability > functions. This may be a bad name, but it is in use, and I would > personally prefer it stay, because all of my articles have called them > that, so people expect that function. > > Ryan > > On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Greg Stein wrote: > > > Why is apr_portable.h full of OS-specific, *NON* -portable stuff? > > > > Shouldn't it be apr_os.h or something? > > > > Cheers, > > -g > > > > -- > > Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/ > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________ ___ > Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 406 29th St. > San Francisco, CA 94131 > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- > >
