On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Would it make sense to introduce APR_FILE_PIPECHECK to ask > apr_os_file_put() to first check an apr_file_info_get() of the handle, and > set the flags correctly if this is a pipe device (e.g. pass this flag for > apr_file_open_stdin/out/err when those are pipes?)
I'm of two minds on this. On one hand, it makes sense, but at the same time, "PIPECHECK" seems to be a bit more information about the internal implementation than usual. Conversely I suppose we could go with a flag to say "this is definitely a file," but then again most of the callers to os_file_put are probably already right, so it makes sense to have the burden of the flag only on the infrequent case (the one where it ISN'T already known to be a file). Hmmmmmm... --Cliff
