On 21.11.2012 07:29, Alex Rousskov wrote:
Hello,
Should the following calls use setDenyMessage() instead?
./auth/negotiate/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage("Authentication in progress");
./auth/negotiate/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage("NTLM authentication requires a
persistent connection");
./auth/negotiate/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage("Login successful");
./auth/negotiate/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage(arg);
./auth/negotiate/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage(blob);
./auth/ntlm/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage("Authentication in progress");
./auth/ntlm/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage("NTLM authentication requires a
persistent connection");
./auth/ntlm/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage("Login successful");
./auth/ntlm/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage(blob);
./auth/ntlm/UserRequest.cc:
auth_user_request->denyMessage(blob);
Yes they should.
I think more importantly that the three forms of this accessor should
be combined into the more normal overloaded forms ASAP:
void denyMessage(const char *msg);
const char *denyMessage(void);
There are only three points in the code needing that default-string
accessor and a fast inline get()?get():default pattern would seem to be
very appropriate for all those usage points.
Amos
