Re: CMake on Unix
Branko Čibej <[email protected]> Tue, 19 May 2026 19:37:08 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.apache.apr.devel |
|---|---|
| Organization | The Apache Software Foundation |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------KNPjdhtSBaR4F02wcmiPwPIj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 19. 5. 26 19:10, Timofei Zhakov wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 5:02 PM Branko Čibej <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 19. 5. 26 15:19, Timofei Zhakov wrote: >> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 11:20 PM Branko Čibej <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> On 18. 5. 26 22:27, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >>> On Mon, 18 May 2026 at 21:24, Timofei Zhakov >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 5:22 PM Branko Čibej >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 18. 5. 26 17:04, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >>> >>> [..] >>> >>> Yes, especially because the Unix and Win32 versions >>> share a lot of things in common but sometimes need to do >>> it in a slightly different way. >>> >>> Also what do you guys think about the fact that Win32 >>> apr.h includes windows.h? It seems odd to me. APR >>> promises to eliminate platform dependence by wrapping >>> everything into POSIX-ish style API >>> >> >> Cross-platform API. I'm not sure what you mean by POSIX-ish, >> but APR isn't that. >> >> >> I mean that the API is similar. For example, apr_file_open() kind >> of works almost like fopen(). Not exactly but in my head I have >> this connection. Okay their signatures are very different and >> even naming, but I think there is some pattern of doing the same >> thing but in a slightly more modern way with a bit more control. >> >>> without extra unneeded junk and then all high level code >>> essentially has GetLastError in the scope. I think if >>> one wants to explicitly use win32 API, they should >>> include those headers themselves. >>> >>> >>> It's a good question. I agree that apr.h should not depend >>> on system headers like Windows.h. But one reason that >>> Windows error codes are used in apr_errno.h. >> >> apr.h is a generated, /system-specific/ header. Of course it >> can and should depend on system headers if it needs them. It >> also includes sys/types.h and sys/socket.h and sys/wait.h and >> os2.h and so on, depending on the target. That makes perfect >> sense. >> >> >> The question I have is whether we really want it or not. >> >> In reality it's always included in every source file. Take >> svn_wc.h for example: >> >> [[[ >> #include <apr.h> >> #include <apr_pools.h> >> #include <apr_tables.h> >> #include <apr_hash.h> >> #include <apr_time.h> >> #include <apr_file_io.h> >> >> #include "svn_types.h" >> #include "svn_string.h" >> #include "svn_checksum.h" >> #include "svn_io.h" >> #include "svn_delta.h" /* for svn_stream_t */ >> #include "svn_opt.h" >> #include "svn_ra.h" /* for svn_ra_reporter_t type */ >> ]]] > > > You'll have to be more specific: what exactly is wrong with that? > apr.h uses symbols defined in windows.h, what else is it supposed > to do? I really don't understand your objections. > > > It shouldn't use any symbols from it. That's what I'm saying. > > However, there are a few places that currently potentially do use it: > > [[[ > #if APR_HAS_UNICODE_FS > /* An arbitrary size that is digestable. True max is a bit less than > 32000 */ > #define APR_PATH_MAX 8192 > #else /* !APR_HAS_UNICODE_FS */ > #define APR_PATH_MAX MAX_PATH > #endif > ]]] > > and > > [[[ > /* Appears in later flavors, not the originals. */ > #ifndef in_addr6 > #define in6_addr in_addr6 > #endif > > #ifndef WS2TCPIP_INLINE > #define IN6_IS_ADDR_V4MAPPED(a) \ > ( (*(const apr_uint64_t *)(const void *)(&(a)->s6_addr[0]) == 0) \ > && (*(const apr_uint32_t *)(const void *)(&(a)->s6_addr[8]) == > ntohl(0x0000ffff))) > #endif > ]]] > > (MAX_PATH, ntohl, in_addr6 are the ones affected) > > I really think those should be somewhere in private headers or in the > sources. MAX_PATH is fine. But ipv6 magic - I don't like it. I really don't know what to say (that isn't sarcastic or condescending). Please take some time to research the consequences of what you're suggesting and while you're doing that, think wider than just Windows. I'll give you a hint: the key words are "APR" and "API". I guess I didn't quite reach the !(sarcastic || condescending) goal. My apologies. > Then we basically just have a header that nobody uses. It also brings > a lot of stuff into the autocomplete. That's just about the worst argument for a wrong technical proposal that I've ever seen. Get a better editor. -- Brane --------------KNPjdhtSBaR4F02wcmiPwPIj Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> </head> <body> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 19. 5. 26 19:10, Timofei Zhakov wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAPD1kXRrTY+7JSCpBL6wfryLN7gt+3baHfjGsMLVrSHYUxBnuQ@mail.gmail.com"> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr">On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 5:02 PM Branko Čibej <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">[email protected]</a>> wrote:</div> <div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div> <div>On 19. 5. 26 15:19, Timofei Zhakov wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote type="cite"> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr">On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 11:20 PM Branko Čibej <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">[email protected]</a>> wrote:</div> <div class="gmail_quote"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div> <div>On 18. 5. 26 22:27, Ivan Zhakov wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote type="cite"> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr">On Mon, 18 May 2026 at 21:24, Timofei Zhakov <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">[email protected]</a>> wrote:</div> <div class="gmail_quote"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr">On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 5:22 PM Branko Čibej <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">[email protected]</a>> wrote:</div> <div class="gmail_quote"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div> <div>On 18. 5. 26 17:04, Ivan Zhakov wrote:<br> </div> </div> </blockquote> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <div>[..] </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr"> <div class="gmail_quote"> <div>Yes, especially because the Unix and Win32 versions share a lot of things in common but sometimes need to do it in a slightly different way.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Also what do you guys think about the fact that Win32 apr.h includes windows.h? It seems odd to me. APR promises to eliminate platform dependence by wrapping everything into POSIX-ish style API</div> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> </div> </div> </blockquote> <br> Cross-platform API. I'm not sure what you mean by POSIX-ish, but APR isn't that.<br> <br> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>I mean that the API is similar. For example, apr_file_open() kind of works almost like fopen(). Not exactly but in my head I have this connection. Okay their signatures are very different and even naming, but I think there is some pattern of doing the same thing but in a slightly more modern way with a bit more control.</div> <div> </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div> <blockquote type="cite"> <div dir="ltr"> <div class="gmail_quote"> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div dir="ltr"> <div dir="ltr"> <div class="gmail_quote"> <div>without extra unneeded junk and then all high level code essentially has GetLastError in the scope. I think if one wants to explicitly use win32 API, they should include those headers themselves.</div> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <br> </div> <div class="gmail_quote">It's a good question. I agree that apr.h should not depend on system headers like Windows.h. But one reason that Windows error codes are used in apr_errno.h.</div> </div> </blockquote> <br> apr.h is a generated, <i>system-specific</i> header. Of course it can and should depend on system headers if it needs them. It also includes sys/types.h and sys/socket.h and sys/wait.h and os2.h and so on, depending on the target. That makes perfect sense.<br> <br> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>The question I have is whether we really want it or not. </div> <div><br> </div> <div>In reality it's always included in every source file. Take svn_wc.h for example:</div> <div><br> </div> <div>[[[</div> <div>#include <apr.h><br> #include <apr_pools.h><br> #include <apr_tables.h><br> #include <apr_hash.h><br> #include <apr_time.h><br> #include <apr_file_io.h><br> <br> #include "svn_types.h"<br> #include "svn_string.h"<br> #include "svn_checksum.h"<br> #include "svn_io.h"<br> #include "svn_delta.h" /* for svn_stream_t */<br> #include "svn_opt.h"<br> #include "svn_ra.h" /* for svn_ra_reporter_t type */<br> ]]]</div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <br> <br> You'll have to be more specific: what exactly is wrong with that? apr.h uses symbols defined in windows.h, what else is it supposed to do? I really don't understand your objections.<br> <br> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>It shouldn't use any symbols from it. That's what I'm saying. </div> </div> <div><br> </div> <div>However, there are a few places that currently potentially do use it:</div> <div><br> </div> <div>[[[</div> <div>#if APR_HAS_UNICODE_FS<br> /* An arbitrary size that is digestable. True max is a bit less than 32000 */<br> #define APR_PATH_MAX 8192<br> #else /* !APR_HAS_UNICODE_FS */<br> #define APR_PATH_MAX MAX_PATH<br> #endif<br> ]]]</div> <div><br> </div> <div>and</div> <div><br> </div> <div>[[[</div> <div>/* Appears in later flavors, not the originals. */<br> #ifndef in_addr6<br> #define in6_addr in_addr6<br> #endif<br> <br> #ifndef WS2TCPIP_INLINE<br> #define IN6_IS_ADDR_V4MAPPED(a) \<br> ( (*(const apr_uint64_t *)(const void *)(&(a)->s6_addr[0]) == 0) \<br> && (*(const apr_uint32_t *)(const void *)(&(a)->s6_addr[8]) == ntohl(0x0000ffff)))<br> #endif<br> ]]]</div> <div><br> </div> <div>(MAX_PATH, ntohl, in_addr6 are the ones affected)</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I really think those should be somewhere in private headers or in the sources. MAX_PATH is fine. But ipv6 magic - I don't like it.</div> </div> </blockquote> <br> I really don't know what to say (that isn't sarcastic or condescending). Please take some time to research the consequences of what you're suggesting and while you're doing that, think wider than just Windows. I'll give you a hint: the key words are "APR" and "API".<br> <br> I guess I didn't quite reach the !(sarcastic || condescending) goal. My apologies.<br> <br> <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAPD1kXRrTY+7JSCpBL6wfryLN7gt+3baHfjGsMLVrSHYUxBnuQ@mail.gmail.com"> <div dir="ltr"> <div>Then we basically just have a header that nobody uses. It also brings a lot of stuff into the autocomplete.</div> </div> </blockquote> <br> That's just about the worst argument for a wrong technical proposal that I've ever seen. Get a better editor.<br> <br> -- Brane<br> <br> </body> </html> --------------KNPjdhtSBaR4F02wcmiPwPIj--