I tried to build the 1.2.28 on my i5/OS system but the compile phase failed ;(
I'm investigating why 2009/3/12 sebb <seb...@gmail.com>: > On 11/03/2009, Rainer Jung <rainer.j...@kippdata.de> wrote: >> Hi Sebb, >> >> On 10.03.2009 21:33, sebb wrote: >> >> > On 10/03/2009, Rainer Jung<rainer.j...@kippdata.de> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi all, >> > > >> > > version 1.2.28 of mod_jk is approaching its release. A code snapshot >> > > (revision 752124) is available at: >> > > >> > > >> http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/dist/tomcat-connectors/jk/source/jk-1.2.28-dev/ >> > > >> > > >> > >> > The NOTICE file is non-standard, as it does not contain the product >> > name or the Copyright year(s). >> > >> > See: >> > >> > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice >> > >> > for details >> > >> >> Fixed in r752627. > > OK. > >> >> > === >> > >> > Incorrect Javadoc: >> > >> org.apache.jk.status.JkStatusTask.setPropertyBalancer >> > >> >> Fixed in r752629 +r752644. The whole JavaDocs are a mess though, they are >> more or less only stubs. The Java parts of the connectors release would need >> a bit of love. > > OK, point taken. > >> >> > === >> > >> > Findbugs reports: >> > org.apache.jk.status.JkStatusParser.digester isn't final >> but should be >> > >> >> I asked Peter to have a look. >> > > Good. > > Shared mutable static fields are generally a bad idea. > > Even private fields are better made final if possible. > >> >> > === >> > >> > Some odd numbers in the code in mod_jk.c: >> > >> > static array_header *parse_request_log_string(pool * p, const char *s, >> > const char **err) >> > { >> > array_header *a = ap_make_array(p, 15, >> sizeof(request_log_format_item)); >> > // Why 15? >> > ... >> > >> >> Initial size, the array will automatically grow, if needed. I first > > Oh, I see. > >> introduced a defined constant for that, and then changed my mind and >> switched to using "0" as the initial size. Arrays and tables resize >> automatically and this is not a critical code path w.r.t. performance. > > OK. > > <soapbox> > I'm always wary about numbers in code - anything other than +/-1 or 0 > has the potential to be wrong or misunderstood, especially if it is > not documented. > > There was recent Tomcat bug to do with timeouts where there was a bare > number 100000 or was it 1000000? The meaning of number was/is not > documented, so it's not trivial to check if it's correct. > > Much easier to understand would be something like > > #define 100MILLISECS_AS_MICROSECS 100000 > > I'd like to see all numbers (apart from 0/1) expressed as defines, but > that is perhaps asking too much. > > Helps document the code, and makes it much easier to change later, as > one can distinguish numbers with the same value but different > functions. > > </soapbox> >> r752636 + r752641. >> > >> > static const char *jk_add_env_var(cmd_parms * cmd, >> > void *dummy, >> > char *env_name, char *default_value) >> > { >> > ... >> > conf->envvar_items = ap_make_array(cmd->pool, 0, >> > sizeof(envvar_item)); >> > // Why 0? This is the number of entries to create? >> > >> >> Default + automatic resize. See above. >> >> Thanks for having a look. >> >> Regards, >> >> Rainer >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
