> From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 01:03:42AM -0700, Brian Pane wrote: > > As it's currently implemented, the C-L filter is trying to compute > > the C-L on everything by default. It only gives up in a few cases: > > Of course, in the common case of a static file with no filters, we > already know the content-length (default handler sets it). > > IIRC, I've brought up skipping the C-L filter when we already know > the C-L (as defined by r->headers_out), but that was not met with > approval.
Who didn't approve that? I was under the impression that we did skip the C-L filter if we already had a C-L, and it was the filters responsibility to remove the C-L if it was changing it. Ryan
