Re: APR is inconsistent about pool behavior

On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 06:58:29PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
>...
> > As you point out: APR is not built to use any behavior other than "abort on
> > alloc failure" (which I believe I pointed out back then, too). As a result,
> > we pretty much *have* to use the abort design. However, that isn't bad at
> > all... it works very well for us, too.
>
> No, that's fine. But if all APR users want that behavior, wouldn't it
> be nicer for it to be the default in APR? At the moment, you have to
> take special pains to get that behavior; I'd think one would rather
> have an abort function set in new pools by default, and provide a call
> to override it, if the caller is willing to take the responsibility.

The argument went something like "a library should never abort() a program,
that is up to the application to define."

*shrug*

I'm in the process of changing our svn_pool_create() function and its
callers. We'll have The Right Behavior(tm).

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/