[erlang-questions] httpd_util:to_lower/1 in R12B-0

Ingela Anderton Andin ingela@REDACTED
Fri Dec 7 09:38:21 CET 2007

 > The R12B-0 says that httpd_util:to_lower/1 is deprecated and will be

> removed in a future release, but it is apparently already removed.

The following functions  httpd_util:to_lower/1, httpd_util:to_upper/1,  httpd_util:decode_base64/1, httpd_util:encode_base64/1 where deprecated already in in R11 (not in R11B-0 though) and hence removed in R12. We apologize if the compiler warnings where not updated accordingly.

> Note the D in httpd_util. There is a http_util:to_lower/1.
> I don't object to the new string:to_lower/1 and
> I have no problem at all in making this change to my code, and
> I may have made an extra sucky choice in using httpd_util:to_lower/1 
> instead of http_util:to_lower/1 (I blame someone else  ;)  ),

You do not need to be ashamed of that, http_util has never been a documented module and 
we do not want it to be either. It was created in an effort to remove code duplication between the http server and client.
httpd_util however is documented, it had quite a few functions
that already from the beginning should have been placed in more general places such as string. We have tried to clean that up.
In general the httpd_util module should only be used by code implementing new mod_*-modules for the inets HTTP-server. 
Personally I would rather not have httpd_util as an API module at all, I think there are even more clean ups in the HTTP server
that could be desirable, (even though quite a lot has been done for r12), but such changes has to be done gradually and removing
httpd_util completely will probably be a too big cost. 

> but I would like to point out that the deprecation warning doesn't match 
> reality.
> /Fredrik

Regards Ingela - OTP team

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list