Re: stacked handlers return vals

2001-10-22 Thread Mark Maunder
Geoffrey Young wrote: > > > what is wrong with DONE? DONE immediatly closes the client > > connection > > > and starts the logging phase. if you have sent the content already > > > then there is nothing to worry about. the call to send_http_header > > > will pick up on the any status you set p

RE: stacked handlers return vals

2001-10-22 Thread Geoffrey Young
> > what is wrong with DONE? DONE immediatly closes the client > connection > > and starts the logging phase. if you have sent the content already > > then there is nothing to worry about. the call to send_http_header > > will pick up on the any status you set previously or use the default >

Re: stacked handlers return vals

2001-10-22 Thread Nikolaus Rath
* Mark Maunder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nikolaus Rath wrote: > >> * Mark Maunder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > If I'm using stacked handlers, what should I return if I dont want the >> > next handler in line to run because I've returned all required content >> > to the client?

Re: stacked handlers return vals

2001-10-22 Thread Nikolaus Rath
* Geoffrey Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If I'm using stacked handlers, what should I return if I >> > > dont want the next handler in line to run because I've returned >> > > all >> required content to the client? (the eagle book says >> > > anything other than >> OK,

Re: stacked handlers return vals

2001-10-21 Thread Mark Maunder
Geoffrey Young wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Mark Maunder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 1:49 PM > > To: Nikolaus Rath > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: stacked handlers return vals > > >

RE: stacked handlers return vals

2001-10-21 Thread Geoffrey Young
> -Original Message- > From: Mark Maunder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 1:49 PM > To: Nikolaus Rath > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: stacked handlers return vals > > > Nikolaus Rath wrote: > > > * Mark Maunder

Re: stacked handlers return vals

2001-10-21 Thread Mark Maunder
Nikolaus Rath wrote: > * Mark Maunder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > If I'm using stacked handlers, what should I return if I dont want the > > next handler in line to run because I've returned all required content > > to the client? (the eagle book says anything other than OK, DECLIN

Re: stacked handlers return vals

2001-10-20 Thread Nikolaus Rath
* Mark Maunder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > If I'm using stacked handlers, what should I return if I dont want the > next handler in line to run because I've returned all required content > to the client? (the eagle book says anything other than OK, DECLINED > or DONE, but what's the appr

stacked handlers return vals

2001-10-19 Thread Mark Maunder
Hi, If I'm using stacked handlers, what should I return if I dont want the next handler in line to run because I've returned all required content to the client? (the eagle book says anything other than OK, DECLINED or DONE, but what's the appropriate return val that wont cause the client to think