Re: [Chicken-users] proposed change to http-client

[Daishi Kato]

Hi,

First of all, I'm so much confortable with your modification,
and I understand that you keep the original behaviour.
I'm proposeing to rewrite http-client.
Sorry for the confusion.

--daishi

At Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:36:42 -0800 (PST),
Elf wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Daishi Kato wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > Why on earth do you want to add "Connection: close" in HTTP/1.0?
> > I think it's meaning-less, I'd propose just
> > to remove adding this header in http:POST, http:GET and http:send-request.
> >
> > Although I'm not sure why http:GET and http:send-request has been
> > adding "Connection: close".
> 
> why did i add it?  i didnt add it.  it was there originally when i started 
> modifying the one function.  the goal was not to do a complete rewrite of the
> http egg, it was to make one particular procedure work correctly over its
> inputs. (the previous state had erroneous assumptions on content.)  i left it
> there because a) it doesnt hurt anything to make it explicit b) it was put
> there initially by someone who knew what they were doing and c) i had neither
> the time nor inclination to try tracing and refactoring an entire egg, 
> especially one that is widely used and is a core component of a lot of 
> interesting very active things.  the one method changed will act exactly the
> way it did before i changed it for the various eggs that use it.  if i 
> randomly
> remove things, i cannot guarantee that things wont break. (not that i can
> guarantee this regardless, but i can demonstrate that for all eggs currently
> in the repo that use http-client will get exactly the same request objects
> sent out as they did before i changed it.)
> 
> 
> -elf
> 
> 
> ******************************
>  XREA.COM -Free Web Hosting-
>  http://www.xrea.com/
> ******************************