RFC-24: request for further comments on item 3.1

[Umberto Nicoletti]

All,
in a previous thread (Subj: [RFC-24] USE_MAPSCRIPT configure flag ) I
attached a patch to let you preview the implementation of item 3.1 (in
particular the USE_MAPSCRIPT flag) before I actually committed it (I
am attaching same patch to this mail again).

Tamas suggested that we drop the need for USE_MAPSCRIPT and let
refcounting always enabled on the following motivations:

1) with the advent of use_mapscript the compilation process will be
different if the user needs to build mapscript rather than the cgi.
While this should not be a big deal for individuals it might place
some extra burden on those maintaining binary distros like ms4w or
fwtools

2) having refcounting enabled does not harm the cgi which should only
experience a tini tiny (if any at all) performance drop because of the
extra if and ++

3) we can always opt to introduce USE_MAPSCRIPT later

4) it simplifies the build process maintaining exactly like it's been until now

5) it simplifies the developer's life because of one less define to mantain

I must say that after some reconsideration I think the USE_MAPSCRIPT
is probably unnecessary, unless we can prove that the CGI is indeed
slower when refcounting is in place, so I am voting +1 on the removal
of USE_MAPSCRIPT.

Note: the patch contains other useful stuff that I'll commit anyway
very soon because it improves python/perl/ruby build process.

Tamas: please fill the gaps if I forgot something...

Regards,
Umberto
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rfc24-USE_MAPSCRIPT.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 18884 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-dev/attachments/20070531/e3b41430/rfc24-USE_MAPSCRIPT.bin