On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 12:11:59PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote: > I vote to fix the API so that these kinds of mistakes can't happen in > the future. I made a lot of mistakes when I designed APR (even though > Manoj tried to convince me I was wrong). One of those mistakes is > having functions use a single variable for both input and result > parameters. I would like to fix that mistake for apr_poll now, as long > as we are changing the implementation.
I don't think that was a mistake. You are adding extra parameters where it just confuses the API. I see no problem with using the same parameter on input/output - provided that it has the same meaning on input and output (same as apr_file_read()). And, it does here, as on input, *nsds is the number of fds to poll and, on output, *nsds is the number of fds polled. The typical Unix convention is to return the *nsds as the output of the function, but APR has explicit error codes, so we can't do that. I don't see a problem with the API and I'm not convinced that we should change it. Regardless, why don't we just fix apr_poll() and then discuss whether we should change/fix the API? -- justin
