Where would we put it? Just copy it into each plugin where it's used?
Have each plugin rewrite code to support RAII?
On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 1:01 PM Chris McFarlen wrote:
> I would advocate for a much higher level plugin API in the direction of
> Cripts that encapsulates much of the minutia of h
I would advocate for a much higher level plugin API in the direction of Cripts
that encapsulates much of the minutia of hooking into the transaction lifecycle
and reduces the rote boilerplate that exists in current plugins. Hopefully
something that will cover the vast majority of use cases with
Would it be possible to propose concrete alternatives? We can't just
simply delete Cleanup.h, the xdebug plugin won't compile.
On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 12:27 PM Chris McFarlen wrote:
> I have read through Cleanup.h and its uses and I agree this is not a style
> we should promote. This code alrea
I have read through Cleanup.h and its uses and I agree this is not a style we
should promote. This code already feels like tech debt in that its bridging C
and C++ APIs in a bolt-on fashion that I think we will want to deprecate
shortly.
While certainly RAII and "smart" pointers are important
I was not talking about the need to use RAII. I just don't think we should
promote Cleanup.h.
On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 7:28 AM Walt Karas
wrote:
> It seems that some are not convinced of the need to use RAII. I won' t get
> into that, it's easy to find writeups advocating for it, which are better
It seems that some are not convinced of the need to use RAII. I won' t get
into that, it's easy to find writeups advocating for it, which are better
than anything I could write.
I have no strong feelings about how things are spelled or abbreviated.
On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 11:22 PM James Peach wr
> On 2 Sep 2023, at 3:44 am, Masakazu Kitajo wrote:
>
>> Its a judgement call, how much to minimize the API.
>
> Yes, that's why we send API proposals on the dev list. And I don't think
> I'm absolutely right. If we, as a community, want to have utilities as TS
> API, that's what we should do.
> Its a judgement call, how much to minimize the API.
Yes, that's why we send API proposals on the dev list. And I don't think
I'm absolutely right. If we, as a community, want to have utilities as TS
API, that's what we should do. I'm disappointed that others don't join this
discussion, but if th
We could also change the API so it provided plugins with raw HTTP headers,
and let each plugin parse the headerd. Its a judgement call, how much to
minimize the API.
Scenario 1. We continue to write code without RAII. We have resulting
resource leaks. We (potentially) find a way to put RAII in
I don't see why we want to provide a helmet with TS API mark. Somebody may
make a third party helmet which is better than ours. Can we steal the
design? Can we make a much better one? I'm not sure because that may
require interface change and/or behavior change. Then ours would be
useless. It's not
The analogy I would make is to needing a helmet to ride a motorcycle. You
don' t need it in the strictest sense, but you need it for a reasonable
level of safety. You need RAII for a reasonable level of safety against
resource leaks.
On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 1:50 PM Masakazu Kitajo wrote:
> I s
I see your point, but I think we need to draw a line. High-priority
capability is blurry and questionable. We have not *needed* it for years.
> We could support RAII better, but I don't think it's feasible in 10.0.
This implies Cleanup.h will be unnecessary after we make it better.
Not discardin
The utilities in Cleanup.h add RAII capabilities to the TS API. I hope we
don't need to have a debate about the value of RAII.
Certainly, any API can become bloated with too many features. But RAII
seems like a high-priority capability to support. We could support RAII
better, but I don't think
I wonder what should be part of TS API. There may be some exceptions, but
TS API basically provides things that can only be done on ATS core.
Question for all, would we want to have utilities as TS API?
-- Masakazu
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 11:48 AM Walt Karas
wrote:
> See the PR https://github.
See the PR https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/10231 . Cleanup.h
is currently available to plugins in include/tscpp/api . The proposal is
to move it to include/ts . The declarations currently in the
atscppapi namespace are moved to the tsapi::c_support namespace. The
c_support sub-name
15 matches
Mail list logo
