[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Molter) wrote:
>However, whenever I pass $r, it invariably gets recreated as an
>Apache object or, if I fiddle around with Apache::PerlRun, it gets
>maybe recreated as an Apache::RegistryNG object, depending on how
>I make PerlRun inherit things. The point is, I /want/ Registry or
>RegistryNG to manage the compilation and management of my script
>code, but the $r I pass in I want to be an Apache object with
>several extended and overridden methods of my design.
>
>Is this feasible at all? The sorts of things that RegistryNG and
>PerlRun do to their request objects sort of destroys any sort of
>inheritance that you setup. Is it better off just to incorporate
>the compilation code into a new module, rather than using what's
>already there?
I've got the same gripe. I don't think RegistryNG should be a subclass
of Apache, and I don't think it should have to make so many changes to
the request object. I've submitted patches to RegistryNG to Doug, but he
hasn't had time to look at them yet.
My changed versions are at
http://forum.swarthmore.edu/~ken/modules/Apache-Filter/lib/Apache/
if you're interested in seeing what I've done.
------------------- -------------------
Ken Williams Last Bastion of Euclidity
[EMAIL PROTECTED] The Math Forum
