"William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote: > . Hooks are _not_ the fastest things in the world, especially with the strcmps > around ->handler going on.
Amen! This one has been bugging me for a long time. It won't show up clearly in a profiler, because the CPU cycles are spread over all the handlers. We are polluting the instruction cache by touching a lot of separate chunks of code that only return DECLINED. > If we resolve the ->handler up front, why not > provide a ->handler_fn member that skips the entire handler() hook walk? The implementation would be interesting. Consider mod_dir and mod_autoindex. Both can deal with DIR_MAGIC_TYPE, and both could be present or absent. But when both are present, the handler topological sort rules must be respected so that handle_dir runs first. How do you propose dealing with that? And what about the few handlers that support fuzzy matches? Greg
