Daniel Gruno wrote: > Dear dev@, > I've been looking into mod_lua for some time now, and have created an > external library with lot of functions that make use of the AP/APR C API > (such as ap_expr calls, scoreboard reading, sha1/md5/b64 functions, dbd > and sendfile support etc). While doing so, I've also thought about how > to improve mod_lua itself, but I now find myself doubting my own > reasoning for committing a directive to the code. > > The directive would/could be called LuaSet, and would set a variable > that is only accessible through Lua, much like mod_perl has PerlSetVar, > and mod_php has...whatever it has. The idea was that you could do > something like: > > LuaSet foo on > <Location /nothere> > LuaSet foo off > </Location> > > and then retrieve that value inside your Lua scripts using something > like r:parseenv() to get a table of Lua-specific values that applied to > that scope. > > However, this could also be managed by using SetEnv or SetEnvIf (if you > hook something real early) and then fetched through r.subprocess_env. So > the question is; Should I bother committing this directive, or is it > just a redundant function? > > On the plus side, it makes it easy in the configuration to spot Lua > specific values and ensures that it doesn't clash with other env > variables that might have been set, and on the other hand, one could > just do something like SetEnv Lua_foo on. > > So what say you, is it a good or a terribly redundant idea? >
IMHO there should be no Lua specific directive if setenv / setenvif can do the same. Regards Rüdiger
