ap_parse_request_form()

[Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>]

Is a pretty cool and useful function... does it really make sense to
have it *only* provided by mod_request? Why not have mod_request
just worry about keeping the req body should the person want it
(ie: be a true filter)...

Anyone have pains if I pull the req. bits out to expose it
as a real extern func? (for 2.3/2.4)

Re: ap_parse_request_form()

[Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>]

On Feb 15, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Nick Kew wrote:

> 
> On 15 Feb 2011, at 17:03, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
>> Is a pretty cool and useful function... does it really make sense to
>> have it *only* provided by mod_request? Why not have mod_request
>> just worry about keeping the req body should the person want it
>> (ie: be a true filter)...
>> 
>> Anyone have pains if I pull the req. bits out to expose it
>> as a real extern func? (for 2.3/2.4)
> 
> +1
> 
> I was also thinking, we should also have a simpler alternative
> form that just populates an apr_table.  For smaller forms,
> buckets seem a big overkill, and it already supports size limits.
> 

Me like. Let me dig in and see what I can do...

Re: ap_parse_request_form()

[Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>]

On 15 Feb 2011, at 17:03, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> Is a pretty cool and useful function... does it really make sense to
> have it *only* provided by mod_request? Why not have mod_request
> just worry about keeping the req body should the person want it
> (ie: be a true filter)...
> 
> Anyone have pains if I pull the req. bits out to expose it
> as a real extern func? (for 2.3/2.4)

+1

I was also thinking, we should also have a simpler alternative
form that just populates an apr_table.  For smaller forms,
buckets seem a big overkill, and it already supports size limits.

(and who uses the filter argument?)

-- 
Nick Kew

Available for work, contract or permanent
http://www.webthing.com/~nick/cv.html