Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Joe Schaefer wrote: >> Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>>while I can easily reproduce the problem with >>>APR::Bucket::alloc_create(APR::Pool->new); >> Would it be possible to rename this sub APR::BucketAlloc::create? >> When I first named it that, I wasn't aware of the APR::BucketAlloc >> package. > > doh! I think you are right. I've missed that bit. I hope our users > will excuse us.
+1. The holidays have left me a few weeks behind modperl's trunk. I'll commit the change once I'm caught up (which may take a few more days), but feel free to take care of it for me if you'd rather not wait for me to catch up. > also it looks that ba has the pool instead, so it was probably > a waste to demand the pool object when $ba is passed anyway. The pool argument to APR::BucketAlloc::create required, I think. If there's an APR::BucketAlloc::pool accessor, it's just retrieving a pointer to the pool that first created it. -- Joe Schaefer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
