Carl Brewer wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
I'm thinking that it might be beneficial to implement it in C.
Would I be better served by switching to using libapreq? Isn't this
what it's for? I recall you sent me that code a long time ago
as the libapreq stuff wouldn't compile cleanly on NetBSD.
I'd pr
Stas Bekman wrote:
I'm thinking that it might be beneficial to implement it in C.
Would I be better served by switching to using libapreq? Isn't this
what it's for? I recall you sent me that code a long time ago
as the libapreq stuff wouldn't compile cleanly on NetBSD.
I'd prefer not to have to
Carl Brewer wrote:
Stas et all,
Here's the code that I was using to grab POSTed values and
put them into a hash 0 sorry for the verbosity of this post,
I won't pretend to fully understand this code, Stas wrote
the majority of it way back when libapreq wouldn't compile
on NetBSD, and I've been usin
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 08:25:05AM +1000, Carl Brewer wrote:
> sub hash_post {
> # this has to get called instead of read_post, as read_post()
> # gobbles up the POST arguments and they're no longer available...
> # and this calls read_post() :)
>
> # returns a hash of all the POST
Stas et all,
Here's the code that I was using to grab POSTed values and
put them into a hash 0 sorry for the verbosity of this post,
I won't pretend to fully understand this code, Stas wrote
the majority of it way back when libapreq wouldn't compile
on NetBSD, and I've been using it ever since.
If
