ok, I took another stab at it. this one is much simpler - it only touches
modperl_callback.c. I didn't see the reason for an enum, and there's no point in moving the logic to lookup_handlers(), since there's nothing that lookup_handlers() knows that modperl_callback() didn't tell it. I'm not too sure about whether that switch statement is the way to go, but it's another iteration for everyone to discuss at least. oh, and the test is more self contained now, too :)
I prefer to extend modperl_handler_lookup_handlers to pick up this information from autogenerated code, same as it's done with desc. Why clutter the maintenance and run-time overhead? It's correct that you don't need to call lookup_handlers() and you have all the info, but you still need to add a switch and ugly sets of ifs. Since you are already calling modperl_handler_lookup_handlers why not pick the information from there and avoid any branching at all?
See the other thread I've spawned from this one. We probably want to handle VOID types differently as well, so it's a perfect addition to the work you do. in that case the run_all var must be a tri-state (that's why I've suggested enums).
Also the test(s) need indentation fixing.
__________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
