On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 12:40:06PM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote: > APR threads, when created, would now take an additional parameter that > is the mechanism (an sms implementation) by which it should create child > pools. As it is now, the "pool" that is passed in to apr_thread_create() > serves as the "parent" pool for the new thread-specific sms. If this > parameter were null, the apr_thread_create() function would not create > a sub-pool or register cleanup routines (which satisfies my requirements).
if at all possible, the behaviour should match as closely as possible the existing situation, when this parameter is NULL, even if the current situation has bugs / is not very nice. this is mainly so that people do not object to having the behaviour of existing code disrupted. luke
