Re: [PATCH] StoreID latest implementation in sync with rev 12552. stage 2-3 from 3.

On 1/3/2013 5:42 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On 01/03/2013 03:16 AM, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
>
>> >Maybe a description like:
>> >"A copy of StoreID reply for the specific cases which the
>> >request->store_id needed but not present"
> Yes, this is better, but still rather convoluted. I suggest something
> like "Store ID for transactions where the request member is nil",
> accompanied with an appropriate getter method that uses request when
> possible and this member when not.

Well the problem is that when accessing the request in these situations
caused some assertion to crash squid in runtime which I do not event
want to try getting there.
I dont have the exact locations right now and will check later but the
places which this store_id is being used are very small (3-4).

Else then OO design what reasons do we have for using this kind of a getter?

Thanks,

-- 
Eliezer Croitoru