Cliff: One thing I don't understand: why make ap_register_rewrite_mapfunc() static and then export it as an optional function? Why isn'it directly a public function provided by mod_rewrite?
Tahiry >From: Cliff Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: Tahiry Ramanamampanoharana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/modules/mappers mod_rewrite.c mod_rewrite.h >(fwd) >Date: Sun, 5 May 2002 23:14:05 -0400 (EDT) >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [63.251.56.142] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBE9F403A00094004311E3FFB388EF3CB0; Sun, 05 May 2002 20:15:07 -0700 >Received: (qmail 5010 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2002 03:14:50 -0000 >Received: (qmail 4997 invoked from network); 6 May 2002 03:14:50 -0000 >From dev-return-29426-nomentsoa Sun, 05 May 2002 20:15:54 -0700 >Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm >Precedence: bulk >list-help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >list-unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >list-post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Message-ID: ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > > >Tahiry: > >I took your patch, played with it a bit, and here's what I came up with. >Rather than using the optional function to pull IN the third-party >function to mod_rewrite, it seems better to have mod_rewrite *export* an >optional function which is a registration function. Support for multiple >extenders is more straightforward that way. This is also how mod_include >does it, by the way. > >Thanks for the idea! > >--Cliff > > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
