Just for the record, I was disputing the correctness and am amazed how many
responses I got from it. It just caught my eye as odd as I personally have
never used that form.
EGAD
that was supposed to be wasN'T disputing not was
*sigh*
Too much Percoset I guess.
--
--
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
>>A quick grep shows this is indeed the only instance, but there are quite a few
>>similar usages in [httpd/modules/ldap/*, so I am not alone at the ASF ;-)
>
> Just for the record, I was disputing the correctness and am amazed how many
> responses I got from it. It jus
Author: gozer
Date: Wed Jan 25 18:10:20 2006
New Revision: 372400
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=372400&view=rev
Log:
style fix
Modified:
perl/modperl/trunk/src/modules/perl/modperl_cmd.c
Modified: perl/modperl/trunk/src/modules/perl/modperl_cmd.c
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/
A quick grep shows this is indeed the only instance, but there are quite a few
similar usages in [httpd/modules/ldap/*, so I am not alone at the ASF ;-)
Just for the record, I was disputing the correctness and am amazed how many
responses I got from it. It just caught my eye as odd as I personal
Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
>>-if(0 == strncasecmp(arg, "+inherit", 8)) {
>>+if (0 == strncasecmp(arg, "+inherit", 8)) {
>>modperl_cmd_options(parms, mconfig, "+InheritSwitches");
>>}
>>else {
>>
> Isn't the normal c idiom
> if (!strncasecmp() ?
>
> I don't think I've ev
-if(0 == strncasecmp(arg, "+inherit", 8)) {
+if (0 == strncasecmp(arg, "+inherit", 8)) {
modperl_cmd_options(parms, mconfig, "+InheritSwitches");
}
else {
Isn't the normal c idiom
if (!strncasecmp() ?
I don't think I've ever seen that form (though correct)
