www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Simple HTTP support

reply Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
Hi,

    My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

    I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and 
I think it should be a part of the standard library.

Is anyone working on this currently?

Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself 
e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if someone 
implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

Thanks
Jonas
Feb 25 2011
next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

 I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and I
 think it should be a part of the standard library.

 Is anyone working on this currently?

 Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself
 e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

 Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if someone
 implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

 Thanks
 Jonas


Here's what I think would be great to do:

1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You wouldn't 
even need to go through the review process, the need and the benefits 
are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.

2. An API design that is safe (libcurl uses void* and unsafe idioms all 
over the API) based on libcurl and integrates well with the rest of 
Phobos. This would ideally be discussed prior to implementation and will 
need to go through a review.

If you do 1, it would be an awesome good step forward.


Andrei
Feb 25 2011
next sibling parent reply Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 25/02/11 16.01, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

 I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and I
 think it should be a part of the standard library.

 Is anyone working on this currently?

 Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself
 e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

 Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if someone
 implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

 Thanks
 Jonas


 Here's what I think would be great to do:

 1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You wouldn't
 even need to go through the review process, the need and the benefits
 are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.


Libcurl declarations could be a way forward. As far as I can see from 
the phobos makefiles there really isn't any dependencies on anything 
other than standard system libraries and zlib. In order to support the 
full curl API the following libs are listed as optional dependencies.

I guess it would not be a good idea to include the source for all these 
like it is done with zlib in etc. So how should this be handled? Should 
all optional deps just be opted out? Alternatively they could be 
statically linked in the binary distribution of phobos?

Optional dependencies:
   *1 = requires OpenSSL, GnuTLS, NSS, yassl, axTLS or PolarSSL
   *2 = requires OpenLDAP
   *3 = requires a GSSAPI-compliant library, such as Heimdal or similar.
   *4 = requires FBopenssl
   *5 = requires a krb4 library, such as the MIT one or similar.
   *6 = requires c-ares
   *7 = requires OpenSSL or NSS, as GnuTLS only supports SSLv3 and TLSv1
   *8 = requires libssh2
   *9 = requires OpenSSL, GnuTLS, NSS or yassl


 2. An API design that is safe (libcurl uses void* and unsafe idioms all
 over the API) based on libcurl and integrates well with the rest of
 Phobos. This would ideally be discussed prior to implementation and will
 need to go through a review.


Do you see this as being based on 1?


 If you do 1, it would be an awesome good step forward.


I'll have to see how hard it would be :)

/Jonas
Feb 25 2011
next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 2/25/11 10:36 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 25/02/11 16.01, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You wouldn't
 even need to go through the review process, the need and the benefits
 are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.


 Libcurl declarations could be a way forward. As far as I can see from
 the phobos makefiles there really isn't any dependencies on anything
 other than standard system libraries and zlib. In order to support the
 full curl API the following libs are listed as optional dependencies.

 I guess it would not be a good idea to include the source for all these
 like it is done with zlib in etc. So how should this be handled? Should
 all optional deps just be opted out? Alternatively they could be
 statically linked in the binary distribution of phobos?


At this point this is open to discussion - in this very group. Perhaps 
the nicest way would be to automatically adapt to whatever is installed 
on the user's platform.

Andrei
Feb 25 2011
parent Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 25/02/11 20.26, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 10:36 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 25/02/11 16.01, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You wouldn't
 even need to go through the review process, the need and the benefits
 are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.


 Libcurl declarations could be a way forward. As far as I can see from
 the phobos makefiles there really isn't any dependencies on anything
 other than standard system libraries and zlib. In order to support the
 full curl API the following libs are listed as optional dependencies.

 I guess it would not be a good idea to include the source for all these
 like it is done with zlib in etc. So how should this be handled? Should
 all optional deps just be opted out? Alternatively they could be
 statically linked in the binary distribution of phobos?


 At this point this is open to discussion - in this very group. Perhaps
 the nicest way would be to automatically adapt to whatever is installed
 on the user's platform.


Adapt at compile time or at run time (e.g. using dlopen() calls)?

/Jonas
Feb 26 2011
prev sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2011-02-25 17:36, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 25/02/11 16.01, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:


 Libcurl declarations could be a way forward. As far as I can see from
 the phobos makefiles there really isn't any dependencies on anything
 other than standard system libraries and zlib. In order to support the
 full curl API the following libs are listed as optional dependencies.

 I guess it would not be a good idea to include the source for all these
 like it is done with zlib in etc. So how should this be handled? Should
 all optional deps just be opted out? Alternatively they could be
 statically linked in the binary distribution of phobos?

 /Jonas


Tango uses zlib and OpenSSL. I you want to use the modules that uses 
those libraries you just have to link to them. If you don't use them you 
don't have to do anything. Of curse, this is as long as Phobos is static 
library. When I think about it maybe Tango dynamically links to OpenSSL 
and statically to zlib.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 25 2011
parent reply Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 25/02/11 21.11, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2011-02-25 17:36, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 25/02/11 16.01, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:


 Libcurl declarations could be a way forward. As far as I can see from
 the phobos makefiles there really isn't any dependencies on anything
 other than standard system libraries and zlib. In order to support the
 full curl API the following libs are listed as optional dependencies.

 I guess it would not be a good idea to include the source for all these
 like it is done with zlib in etc. So how should this be handled? Should
 all optional deps just be opted out? Alternatively they could be
 statically linked in the binary distribution of phobos?

 /Jonas


 Tango uses zlib and OpenSSL. I you want to use the modules that uses
 those libraries you just have to link to them. If you don't use them you
 don't have to do anything. Of curse, this is as long as Phobos is static
 library. When I think about it maybe Tango dynamically links to OpenSSL
 and statically to zlib.


I'll give the tango version a look.

thanks
/Jonas
Feb 26 2011
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2011-02-26 23:18, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 25/02/11 21.11, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2011-02-25 17:36, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 25/02/11 16.01, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:


 Libcurl declarations could be a way forward. As far as I can see from
 the phobos makefiles there really isn't any dependencies on anything
 other than standard system libraries and zlib. In order to support the
 full curl API the following libs are listed as optional dependencies.

 I guess it would not be a good idea to include the source for all these
 like it is done with zlib in etc. So how should this be handled? Should
 all optional deps just be opted out? Alternatively they could be
 statically linked in the binary distribution of phobos?

 /Jonas


 Tango uses zlib and OpenSSL. I you want to use the modules that uses
 those libraries you just have to link to them. If you don't use them you
 don't have to do anything. Of curse, this is as long as Phobos is static
 library. When I think about it maybe Tango dynamically links to OpenSSL
 and statically to zlib.


 I'll give the tango version a look.

 thanks
 /Jonas


I you want to contribute to Phobos do NOT look at the Tango sources. The 
Phobos developers don't like it.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 27 2011
parent reply Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 27/02/11 11.47, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I you want to contribute to Phobos do NOT look at the Tango sources. The
 Phobos developers don't like it.


Okey. That is indeed nice to know. But what is it that they don't like. 
The source code, the design, the API...? It's good to know what not to 
do if something is to be included in phobos :)

/Jonas
Feb 27 2011
next sibling parent Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes gmail.com> writes:
Am 27.02.2011 15:50, schrieb Jonas Drewsen:

 On 27/02/11 11.47, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I you want to contribute to Phobos do NOT look at the Tango sources. The
 Phobos developers don't like it.


 Okey. That is indeed nice to know. But what is it that they don't like.
 The source code, the design, the API...? It's good to know what not to
 do if something is to be included in phobos :)

 /Jonas


There has been an incident where somebody, who was familiar with the 
corresponding Tango API, wrote a module for Phobos. Tango devs claimed 
he copied code and thus his code couldn't be included in Phobos.
Part of the problem is that Tango's license (BSD-style) is less 
permissive than Phobos' boost-license, so code from Tango can't be 
reused in Phobos.

Cheers,
- Daniel
Feb 27 2011
prev sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Sunday 27 February 2011 08:01:36 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/27/11 8:50 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 27/02/11 11.47, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I you want to contribute to Phobos do NOT look at the Tango sources. The
 Phobos developers don't like it.


 
 Okey. That is indeed nice to know. But what is it that they don't like.
 The source code, the design, the API...? It's good to know what not to
 do if something is to be included in phobos :)
 
 /Jonas


 
 WTF? Jacob, for Pete's sake please stop spreading FUD and fomenting
 another interminable discussion. This is not about liking!


True. And we _don't_ want another discussion about this. But the point still 
stands that we'd prefer that anyone looking to work on a submission for Phobos 
not look at the corresponding Tango API or source code. Misunderstandings and 
licensing issues are possible, and we don't want to get into that again. It has 
gotten blown out of proportion in the past, and I think that a large portion of 
the posters around here don't understand what really happened (hence the FUD -
I 
very much doubt that Jacob is purposely misinterpreting what happened).

So, we don't want to get into that again (though unfortunately, it's bound to 
come up just about any time someone mentions looking at Tango), but it _is_
true 
that it's just cleaner for those working on Phobos to avoid Tango. That way, 
misunderstandings (on both sides) can be avoided, and we won't have any 
potential licensing issues.

- Jonathan M Davis
Feb 27 2011
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2011-02-28 01:30, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Sunday 27 February 2011 08:01:36 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/27/11 8:50 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 27/02/11 11.47, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I you want to contribute to Phobos do NOT look at the Tango sources. The
 Phobos developers don't like it.


 Okey. That is indeed nice to know. But what is it that they don't like.
 The source code, the design, the API...? It's good to know what not to
 do if something is to be included in phobos :)

 /Jonas


 WTF? Jacob, for Pete's sake please stop spreading FUD and fomenting
 another interminable discussion. This is not about liking!


 True. And we _don't_ want another discussion about this. But the point still
 stands that we'd prefer that anyone looking to work on a submission for Phobos
 not look at the corresponding Tango API or source code. Misunderstandings and
 licensing issues are possible, and we don't want to get into that again. It has
 gotten blown out of proportion in the past, and I think that a large portion of
 the posters around here don't understand what really happened (hence the FUD -
I
 very much doubt that Jacob is purposely misinterpreting what happened).

 So, we don't want to get into that again (though unfortunately, it's bound to
 come up just about any time someone mentions looking at Tango), but it _is_
true
 that it's just cleaner for those working on Phobos to avoid Tango. That way,
 misunderstandings (on both sides) can be avoided, and we won't have any
 potential licensing issues.

 - Jonathan M Davis


I can't find that post by Andrei, neither in my newsgroup reader 
application or the web interface. Has someone removed that post?

I don't understand what all the noise is about. I just tried to warn him 
BEFORE he starts looking at the Tango sources. Then starts implementing 
code that could be interpreted as based on the Tango source and hoping 
to contribute that to Phobos.

The Tango developers aren't happy about including Tango source code into 
Phobos. Because of that, Phobos developers don't want you to look at 
Tango code and then contributing similar code to Phobos, correct me if 
I'm wrong.

Actually I don't care if it's the Tango or Phobos developers that don't 
like it.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 28 2011
next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Monday 28 February 2011 01:59:41 Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2011-02-28 01:30, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Sunday 27 February 2011 08:01:36 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/27/11 8:50 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 27/02/11 11.47, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I you want to contribute to Phobos do NOT look at the Tango sources.
 The Phobos developers don't like it.


 
 Okey. That is indeed nice to know. But what is it that they don't like.
 The source code, the design, the API...? It's good to know what not to
 do if something is to be included in phobos :)
 
 /Jonas


 
 WTF? Jacob, for Pete's sake please stop spreading FUD and fomenting
 another interminable discussion. This is not about liking!


 
 True. And we _don't_ want another discussion about this. But the point
 still stands that we'd prefer that anyone looking to work on a
 submission for Phobos not look at the corresponding Tango API or source
 code. Misunderstandings and licensing issues are possible, and we don't
 want to get into that again. It has gotten blown out of proportion in
 the past, and I think that a large portion of the posters around here
 don't understand what really happened (hence the FUD - I very much doubt
 that Jacob is purposely misinterpreting what happened).
 
 So, we don't want to get into that again (though unfortunately, it's
 bound to come up just about any time someone mentions looking at Tango),
 but it _is_ true that it's just cleaner for those working on Phobos to
 avoid Tango. That way, misunderstandings (on both sides) can be avoided,
 and we won't have any potential licensing issues.
 
 - Jonathan M Davis


 
 I can't find that post by Andrei, neither in my newsgroup reader
 application or the web interface. Has someone removed that post?
 
 I don't understand what all the noise is about. I just tried to warn him
 BEFORE he starts looking at the Tango sources. Then starts implementing
 code that could be interpreted as based on the Tango source and hoping
 to contribute that to Phobos.
 
 The Tango developers aren't happy about including Tango source code into
 Phobos. Because of that, Phobos developers don't want you to look at
 Tango code and then contributing similar code to Phobos, correct me if
 I'm wrong.
 
 Actually I don't care if it's the Tango or Phobos developers that don't
 like it.


I believe that Andrei was displeased with you saying that the Tango developers 
"don't like it," since that's not necessarily true. The fact that you were 
pointing out that anyone looking to submit code to Phobos shouldn't be looking 
at Tango's API or source code is just fine.

As I understand it, essentially what happened before was that a single Tango 
developer expressed concern that someone might think that there was license 
infringement on SHOO's part in what he did with the time code that he was 
working on, because he had seen Tango's API (and possibly code) previously (and 
his API might have been similar - I'm not sure). The Tango developers were
never 
up in arms about it or getting mad at us or anything of the sort. _One_ 
developer expressed concern about someone thinking that infringement occurred. 
That's all. However, it got blown out of proportion by the folks on this 
newsgroup with them getting mad at the Tango developers. Andrei (and others)
are 
sick of this coming up again and again - particularly when it frequently turns 
into an anti-Tango or anti-Tango developer debate.

As I understand it, it _is_ true that there are Tango developers who don't want 
their code in Phobos, but I don't believe that they've ever been nasty about it 
as some of the posters here have thought. Tango _does_ have a different license 
than Phobos, and the Tango developers have every right to share their code or 
not. So, you can't copy code from there unless you wrote it in the first place, 
or if you get permission to do so from the developers who wrote it (which isn't 
necessarily easy).

The decision was made that there was no need to look at Tango or copy its code 
or API and that we didn't want even the possibility of conflict between the two 
communities if it could be reasonably avoided. So, for the most part, Phobos 
developers just don't look at the Tango API or code, and we don't want folks
who 
are looking to submit code to Phobos to be looking at Tango's API or code. It's 
just simpler that we. We have nothing against the Tango developers or what 
they're doing. As I understand it, they've written some great code, and as far 
as I'm concerned, all the more power to them. But we don't want to risk any 
conflict or misunderstandings between the two communities, so those developing 
Phobos code avoid Tango.

Really, I don't think that there was all that much wrong with what you said 
(it's not like you were explicitly trying to give misinformation), but there
are 
those (Andrei included) who are very sensitive to and/or sick of this issue and 
don't want it blowing up again. So, Andrei took offense to how your response
was 
worded.

- Jonathan M Davis


P.S. Everyone, please do _not_ say anything in this thread about the whole
Tango 
licensing issue unless you have something truly constructive to say. We do
_not_ 
need further debate, arguments, or flaming on this topic (and I'm not
specifically 
singling anyone out when I say that; we just want to avoid any more problems 
about this topic).

And in the future, while we _should_ point out to anyone that asks (or that 
obviously needs to be told) that those developing for Phobos shouldn't be 
looking at Tango's API or code because of the difference in licenses between 
Tango and Phobos, we should _not_ be going into whatever issues have or haven't 
occurred with the Tango team or this newsgroup in the past. This is a sensitive 
topic which has created too much flaming and discontent around here in the
past. 
We don't copy Tango code, because it has a different license, not because of
any 
problems with the Tango developers.
Feb 28 2011
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2011-02-28 12:21, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Monday 28 February 2011 01:59:41 Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2011-02-28 01:30, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Sunday 27 February 2011 08:01:36 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/27/11 8:50 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 27/02/11 11.47, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I you want to contribute to Phobos do NOT look at the Tango sources.
 The Phobos developers don't like it.


 Okey. That is indeed nice to know. But what is it that they don't like.
 The source code, the design, the API...? It's good to know what not to
 do if something is to be included in phobos :)

 /Jonas


 WTF? Jacob, for Pete's sake please stop spreading FUD and fomenting
 another interminable discussion. This is not about liking!


 True. And we _don't_ want another discussion about this. But the point
 still stands that we'd prefer that anyone looking to work on a
 submission for Phobos not look at the corresponding Tango API or source
 code. Misunderstandings and licensing issues are possible, and we don't
 want to get into that again. It has gotten blown out of proportion in
 the past, and I think that a large portion of the posters around here
 don't understand what really happened (hence the FUD - I very much doubt
 that Jacob is purposely misinterpreting what happened).

 So, we don't want to get into that again (though unfortunately, it's
 bound to come up just about any time someone mentions looking at Tango),
 but it _is_ true that it's just cleaner for those working on Phobos to
 avoid Tango. That way, misunderstandings (on both sides) can be avoided,
 and we won't have any potential licensing issues.

 - Jonathan M Davis


 I can't find that post by Andrei, neither in my newsgroup reader
 application or the web interface. Has someone removed that post?

 I don't understand what all the noise is about. I just tried to warn him
 BEFORE he starts looking at the Tango sources. Then starts implementing
 code that could be interpreted as based on the Tango source and hoping
 to contribute that to Phobos.

 The Tango developers aren't happy about including Tango source code into
 Phobos. Because of that, Phobos developers don't want you to look at
 Tango code and then contributing similar code to Phobos, correct me if
 I'm wrong.

 Actually I don't care if it's the Tango or Phobos developers that don't
 like it.


 I believe that Andrei was displeased with you saying that the Tango developers
 "don't like it," since that's not necessarily true. The fact that you were
 pointing out that anyone looking to submit code to Phobos shouldn't be looking
 at Tango's API or source code is just fine.

 As I understand it, essentially what happened before was that a single Tango
 developer expressed concern that someone might think that there was license
 infringement on SHOO's part in what he did with the time code that he was
 working on, because he had seen Tango's API (and possibly code) previously (and
 his API might have been similar - I'm not sure). The Tango developers were
never
 up in arms about it or getting mad at us or anything of the sort. _One_
 developer expressed concern about someone thinking that infringement occurred.
 That's all. However, it got blown out of proportion by the folks on this
 newsgroup with them getting mad at the Tango developers. Andrei (and others)
are
 sick of this coming up again and again - particularly when it frequently turns
 into an anti-Tango or anti-Tango developer debate.

 As I understand it, it _is_ true that there are Tango developers who don't want
 their code in Phobos, but I don't believe that they've ever been nasty about it
 as some of the posters here have thought. Tango _does_ have a different license
 than Phobos, and the Tango developers have every right to share their code or
 not. So, you can't copy code from there unless you wrote it in the first place,
 or if you get permission to do so from the developers who wrote it (which isn't
 necessarily easy).

 The decision was made that there was no need to look at Tango or copy its code
 or API and that we didn't want even the possibility of conflict between the two
 communities if it could be reasonably avoided. So, for the most part, Phobos
 developers just don't look at the Tango API or code, and we don't want folks
who
 are looking to submit code to Phobos to be looking at Tango's API or code. It's
 just simpler that we. We have nothing against the Tango developers or what
 they're doing. As I understand it, they've written some great code, and as far
 as I'm concerned, all the more power to them. But we don't want to risk any
 conflict or misunderstandings between the two communities, so those developing
 Phobos code avoid Tango.

 Really, I don't think that there was all that much wrong with what you said
 (it's not like you were explicitly trying to give misinformation), but there
are
 those (Andrei included) who are very sensitive to and/or sick of this issue and
 don't want it blowing up again. So, Andrei took offense to how your response
was
 worded.

 - Jonathan M Davis


 P.S. Everyone, please do _not_ say anything in this thread about the whole
Tango
 licensing issue unless you have something truly constructive to say. We do
_not_
 need further debate, arguments, or flaming on this topic (and I'm not
specifically
 singling anyone out when I say that; we just want to avoid any more problems
 about this topic).

 And in the future, while we _should_ point out to anyone that asks (or that
 obviously needs to be told) that those developing for Phobos shouldn't be
 looking at Tango's API or code because of the difference in licenses between
 Tango and Phobos, we should _not_ be going into whatever issues have or haven't
 occurred with the Tango team or this newsgroup in the past. This is a sensitive
 topic which has created too much flaming and discontent around here in the
past.
 We don't copy Tango code, because it has a different license, not because of
any
 problems with the Tango developers.


I agree, but when someone says "You shouldn't look at Tango code if you 
want to contribute to Phobos code" then someone else will ask "why?". 
Should we just respond "incompatible licenses" and leave it like that? 
I have no problem with that.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 28 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 04:59:41 -0500, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:


 I can't find that post by Andrei, neither in my newsgroup reader  
 application or the web interface. Has someone removed that post?


One is allowed to cancel one's posts (some newsreaders support this  
feature, for example in Opera, you go to your sent items, and right click  
on a sent message and there is a "Cancel Post" option).  Jonathan's  
newsreader must have downloaded the message before Andrei retracted it.   
If my newsreader is running (which it was) when a canceled post goes  
through, I get a header, but no message, because the message is not  
downloaded until I click on it (which is what I got for this post).

Not joining the discussion, but I just wanted to clarify to avoid any  
thoughts of conspiracy ;)

-Steve
Feb 28 2011
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2011-02-28 14:08, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 04:59:41 -0500, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:


 I can't find that post by Andrei, neither in my newsgroup reader
 application or the web interface. Has someone removed that post?


 One is allowed to cancel one's posts (some newsreaders support this
 feature, for example in Opera, you go to your sent items, and right
 click on a sent message and there is a "Cancel Post" option). Jonathan's
 newsreader must have downloaded the message before Andrei retracted it.
 If my newsreader is running (which it was) when a canceled post goes
 through, I get a header, but no message, because the message is not
 downloaded until I click on it (which is what I got for this post).

 Not joining the discussion, but I just wanted to clarify to avoid any
 thoughts of conspiracy ;)

 -Steve


Ok, thanks.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 28 2011
prev sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 2/28/11 3:59 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2011-02-28 01:30, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Sunday 27 February 2011 08:01:36 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/27/11 8:50 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 27/02/11 11.47, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I you want to contribute to Phobos do NOT look at the Tango
 sources. The
 Phobos developers don't like it.


 Okey. That is indeed nice to know. But what is it that they don't like.
 The source code, the design, the API...? It's good to know what not to
 do if something is to be included in phobos :)

 /Jonas


 WTF? Jacob, for Pete's sake please stop spreading FUD and fomenting
 another interminable discussion. This is not about liking!


 True. And we _don't_ want another discussion about this. But the point
 still
 stands that we'd prefer that anyone looking to work on a submission
 for Phobos
 not look at the corresponding Tango API or source code.
 Misunderstandings and
 licensing issues are possible, and we don't want to get into that
 again. It has
 gotten blown out of proportion in the past, and I think that a large
 portion of
 the posters around here don't understand what really happened (hence
 the FUD - I
 very much doubt that Jacob is purposely misinterpreting what happened).

 So, we don't want to get into that again (though unfortunately, it's
 bound to
 come up just about any time someone mentions looking at Tango), but it
 _is_ true
 that it's just cleaner for those working on Phobos to avoid Tango.
 That way,
 misunderstandings (on both sides) can be avoided, and we won't have any
 potential licensing issues.

 - Jonathan M Davis


 I can't find that post by Andrei, neither in my newsgroup reader
 application or the web interface. Has someone removed that post?


I have removed it shortly after posting because I realized it would have 
(in fact now it has since it's been quoted) added more to the discussion 
it was trying to avoid.


 I don't understand what all the noise is about. I just tried to warn him
 BEFORE he starts looking at the Tango sources. Then starts implementing
 code that could be interpreted as based on the Tango source and hoping
 to contribute that to Phobos.

 The Tango developers aren't happy about including Tango source code into
 Phobos. Because of that, Phobos developers don't want you to look at
 Tango code and then contributing similar code to Phobos, correct me if
 I'm wrong.

 Actually I don't care if it's the Tango or Phobos developers that don't
 like it.


The noise is about the fact that the initial post makes a gross 
misrepresentation of the situation. It can be interpreted two ways: the 
final "it" means "looking at Tango's sources", or the final "it" means 
"Tango". Either way, it squarely spreads disinformation.


Andrei
Feb 28 2011
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2011-02-28 14:55, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/28/11 3:59 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2011-02-28 01:30, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Sunday 27 February 2011 08:01:36 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/27/11 8:50 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 27/02/11 11.47, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I you want to contribute to Phobos do NOT look at the Tango
 sources. The
 Phobos developers don't like it.


 Okey. That is indeed nice to know. But what is it that they don't
 like.
 The source code, the design, the API...? It's good to know what not to
 do if something is to be included in phobos :)

 /Jonas


 WTF? Jacob, for Pete's sake please stop spreading FUD and fomenting
 another interminable discussion. This is not about liking!


 True. And we _don't_ want another discussion about this. But the point
 still
 stands that we'd prefer that anyone looking to work on a submission
 for Phobos
 not look at the corresponding Tango API or source code.
 Misunderstandings and
 licensing issues are possible, and we don't want to get into that
 again. It has
 gotten blown out of proportion in the past, and I think that a large
 portion of
 the posters around here don't understand what really happened (hence
 the FUD - I
 very much doubt that Jacob is purposely misinterpreting what happened).

 So, we don't want to get into that again (though unfortunately, it's
 bound to
 come up just about any time someone mentions looking at Tango), but it
 _is_ true
 that it's just cleaner for those working on Phobos to avoid Tango.
 That way,
 misunderstandings (on both sides) can be avoided, and we won't have any
 potential licensing issues.

 - Jonathan M Davis


 I can't find that post by Andrei, neither in my newsgroup reader
 application or the web interface. Has someone removed that post?


 I have removed it shortly after posting because I realized it would have
 (in fact now it has since it's been quoted) added more to the discussion
 it was trying to avoid.


Ok, thanks for the clarification.


 I don't understand what all the noise is about. I just tried to warn him
 BEFORE he starts looking at the Tango sources. Then starts implementing
 code that could be interpreted as based on the Tango source and hoping
 to contribute that to Phobos.

 The Tango developers aren't happy about including Tango source code into
 Phobos. Because of that, Phobos developers don't want you to look at
 Tango code and then contributing similar code to Phobos, correct me if
 I'm wrong.

 Actually I don't care if it's the Tango or Phobos developers that don't
 like it.


 The noise is about the fact that the initial post makes a gross
 misrepresentation of the situation. It can be interpreted two ways: the
 final "it" means "looking at Tango's sources", or the final "it" means
 "Tango". Either way, it squarely spreads disinformation.


 Andrei


What I meant by the last sentence was:

The Phobos developer does not like that one look at the Tango source 
code and then contributes similar code to Phobos.

If that is incorrect then please tell so and I'm sorry if I spread any 
disinformation. I guess we should end this discussion.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Feb 28 2011
parent "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:02:40 -0500, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:



 What I meant by the last sentence was:

 The Phobos developer does not like that one look at the Tango source  
 code and then contributes similar code to Phobos.

 If that is incorrect then please tell so and I'm sorry if I spread any  
 disinformation. I guess we should end this discussion.


That is incorrect.  Phobos will accept code from anyone as long as the  
code's author(s) are properly attributed and the license is Boost 1.0 or  
compatible.  Potentially, Tango code could be included in phobos with  
proper attribution if the respected authors re-released the code under a  
compatible license.

-Steve
Feb 28 2011
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Johannes Pfau <spam example.com> writes:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

 I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and I
 think it should be a part of the standard library.

 Is anyone working on this currently?

 Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself
 e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

 Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if someone
 implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

 Thanks
 Jonas


Here's what I think would be great to do:

1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You
wouldn't even need to go through the review process, the need and the
benefits are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.


I remember there was some discussion about that some time ago. Graham
Fawcett has a declarations module here:
https://github.com/gmfawcett/d-play-libcurl/blob/master/fawcett/curl.d .
It's not complete (only wraps the simple curl api), but it's a start.
I think he was even willing to contribute it to phobos, but I'm not
sure.


2. An API design that is safe (libcurl uses void* and unsafe idioms
all over the API) based on libcurl and integrates well with the rest
of Phobos. This would ideally be discussed prior to implementation and
will need to go through a review.

If you do 1, it would be an awesome good step forward.


Andrei


I've been working on a webclient like api now and then, but I haven't
got the time right now to continue it and the code currently is a mess.
The biggest problem I faced is curls 'push interface', you receive all
data in a callback. Webclients in other languages offer a 'pull' /
stream like api and i couldn't find a good way to support that with
curl.

--=20
Johannes Pfau
Feb 25 2011
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 2/25/11 1:16 PM, Johannes Pfau wrote:

 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

 I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and I
 think it should be a part of the standard library.

 Is anyone working on this currently?

 Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself
 e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

 Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if someone
 implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

 Thanks
 Jonas


 Here's what I think would be great to do:

 1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You
 wouldn't even need to go through the review process, the need and the
 benefits are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.


 I remember there was some discussion about that some time ago. Graham
 Fawcett has a declarations module here:
 https://github.com/gmfawcett/d-play-libcurl/blob/master/fawcett/curl.d .
 It's not complete (only wraps the simple curl api), but it's a start.
 I think he was even willing to contribute it to phobos, but I'm not
 sure.


Graham?


 I've been working on a webclient like api now and then, but I haven't
 got the time right now to continue it and the code currently is a mess.
 The biggest problem I faced is curls 'push interface', you receive all
 data in a callback. Webclients in other languages offer a 'pull' /
 stream like api and i couldn't find a good way to support that with
 curl.


You can do both with curl IIRC, it's a bit more work - you need is do 
the work in a separate hidden thread and use synchronization or message 
passing with client's thread.

Andrei
Feb 25 2011
parent reply Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 25/02/11 20.31, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 1:16 PM, Johannes Pfau wrote:

 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

 I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and I
 think it should be a part of the standard library.

 Is anyone working on this currently?

 Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself
 e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

 Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if someone
 implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

 Thanks
 Jonas


 Here's what I think would be great to do:

 1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You
 wouldn't even need to go through the review process, the need and the
 benefits are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.


 I remember there was some discussion about that some time ago. Graham
 Fawcett has a declarations module here:
 https://github.com/gmfawcett/d-play-libcurl/blob/master/fawcett/curl.d .
 It's not complete (only wraps the simple curl api), but it's a start.
 I think he was even willing to contribute it to phobos, but I'm not
 sure.


 Graham?


I've contacted him via github and asked it he is willing contribute it 
to phobos. It probably needs to be finished and polished but I think it 
is a good start.


 I've been working on a webclient like api now and then, but I haven't
 got the time right now to continue it and the code currently is a mess.
 The biggest problem I faced is curls 'push interface', you receive all
 data in a callback. Webclients in other languages offer a 'pull' /
 stream like api and i couldn't find a good way to support that with
 curl.


 You can do both with curl IIRC, it's a bit more work - you need is do
 the work in a separate hidden thread and use synchronization or message
 passing with client's thread.


It would also be nice with a async support using futures/deferreds. In 
most cases I think it is easier to debug single threaded async IO than 
using threads.

/Jonas
Feb 26 2011
parent reply Graham Fawcett <fawcett uwindsor.ca> writes:
Hi folks,

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:42:33 +0100, Jonas Drewsen wrote:


 On 25/02/11 20.31, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 1:16 PM, Johannes Pfau wrote:

 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

 I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and
 I think it should be a part of the standard library.

 Is anyone working on this currently?

 Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself
 e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

 Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if
 someone implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

 Thanks
 Jonas


 Here's what I think would be great to do:

 1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You
 wouldn't even need to go through the review process, the need and the
 benefits are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.


 I remember there was some discussion about that some time ago. Graham
 Fawcett has a declarations module here:
 https://github.com/gmfawcett/d-play-libcurl/blob/master/fawcett/curl.d
 . It's not complete (only wraps the simple curl api), but it's a
 start. I think he was even willing to contribute it to phobos, but I'm
 not sure.


 Graham?


 
 I've contacted him via github and asked it he is willing contribute it
 to phobos. It probably needs to be finished and polished but I think it
 is a good start.


Yes, Jonas contacted me, and I'm very happy to contribute it. I've just 
added a Boost 1.0 license, and Jonas is going to take it from there.

Sorry for missing this, I haven't had much time for the D list lately. :P

Best,
Graham




 

 I've been working on a webclient like api now and then, but I haven't
 got the time right now to continue it and the code currently is a
 mess. The biggest problem I faced is curls 'push interface', you
 receive all data in a callback. Webclients in other languages offer a
 'pull' / stream like api and i couldn't find a good way to support
 that with curl.


 You can do both with curl IIRC, it's a bit more work - you need is do
 the work in a separate hidden thread and use synchronization or message
 passing with client's thread.


 
 It would also be nice with a async support using futures/deferreds. In
 most cases I think it is easier to debug single threaded async IO than
 using threads.
 
 /Jonas
Feb 28 2011
next sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 2/28/11 9:59 AM, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 Hi folks,

 On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:42:33 +0100, Jonas Drewsen wrote:


 On 25/02/11 20.31, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 1:16 PM, Johannes Pfau wrote:

 I remember there was some discussion about that some time ago. Graham
 Fawcett has a declarations module here:
 https://github.com/gmfawcett/d-play-libcurl/blob/master/fawcett/curl.d
 . It's not complete (only wraps the simple curl api), but it's a
 start. I think he was even willing to contribute it to phobos, but I'm
 not sure.


 Graham?


 I've contacted him via github and asked it he is willing contribute it
 to phobos. It probably needs to be finished and polished but I think it
 is a good start.


 Yes, Jonas contacted me, and I'm very happy to contribute it. I've just
 added a Boost 1.0 license, and Jonas is going to take it from there.

 Sorry for missing this, I haven't had much time for the D list lately. :P

 Best,
 Graham


Thanks, Graham!

Andrei
Feb 28 2011
prev sibling parent Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 28/02/11 16.59, Graham Fawcett wrote:

 Hi folks,

 On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:42:33 +0100, Jonas Drewsen wrote:


 On 25/02/11 20.31, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 1:16 PM, Johannes Pfau wrote:

 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

 I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and
 I think it should be a part of the standard library.

 Is anyone working on this currently?

 Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself
 e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

 Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if
 someone implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

 Thanks
 Jonas


 Here's what I think would be great to do:

 1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You
 wouldn't even need to go through the review process, the need and the
 benefits are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.


 I remember there was some discussion about that some time ago. Graham
 Fawcett has a declarations module here:
 https://github.com/gmfawcett/d-play-libcurl/blob/master/fawcett/curl.d
 . It's not complete (only wraps the simple curl api), but it's a
 start. I think he was even willing to contribute it to phobos, but I'm
 not sure.


 Graham?


 I've contacted him via github and asked it he is willing contribute it
 to phobos. It probably needs to be finished and polished but I think it
 is a good start.


 Yes, Jonas contacted me, and I'm very happy to contribute it. I've just
 added a Boost 1.0 license, and Jonas is going to take it from there.

 Sorry for missing this, I haven't had much time for the D list lately. :P

 Best,
 Graham


Thank you Graham.
Feb 28 2011
prev sibling parent reply Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 25/02/11 16.01, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

 I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and I
 think it should be a part of the standard library.

 Is anyone working on this currently?

 Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself
 e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

 Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if someone
 implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

 Thanks
 Jonas


 Here's what I think would be great to do:

 1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You wouldn't
 even need to go through the review process, the need and the benefits
 are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.

 2. An API design that is safe (libcurl uses void* and unsafe idioms all
 over the API) based on libcurl and integrates well with the rest of
 Phobos. This would ideally be discussed prior to implementation and will
 need to go through a review.

 If you do 1, it would be an awesome good step forward.


So I've been trying to begin this curl declarations module. I looked a 
libcurls home page and there already is a D binding:

http://curl.haxx.se/libcurl/d/

This one uses the htod tool to make a declaration module from the 
libcurl headers and creates a curldef.d file.

In addition to this it defines a normal D class (libcurl.d) that wraps 
only the basic curl functionality in order to provide a nicer interface.

I haven't created a declaration module before so my question is whether 
this would also be the right approach for a module in phobos 'etc'?

/Jonas
Mar 01 2011
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 3/1/11 3:54 PM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 On 25/02/11 16.01, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 2/25/11 8:48 AM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 My first post here so I don't know if this is the right place.

 I like how phobos is coming along but really miss a HTTP client and I
 think it should be a part of the standard library.

 Is anyone working on this currently?

 Any thoughts/heads-up if I decide to go ahead an implement it myself
 e.g. regarding ranges and other stuff?

 Is it at all possible to get such thing accepted in phobos if someone
 implemented it (and the quality is good enough)?

 Thanks
 Jonas


 Here's what I think would be great to do:

 1. A declarations module for libcurl. We'd put that in etc. You wouldn't
 even need to go through the review process, the need and the benefits
 are obvious. Nobody has had a chance to do that yet.

 2. An API design that is safe (libcurl uses void* and unsafe idioms all
 over the API) based on libcurl and integrates well with the rest of
 Phobos. This would ideally be discussed prior to implementation and will
 need to go through a review.

 If you do 1, it would be an awesome good step forward.


 So I've been trying to begin this curl declarations module. I looked a
 libcurls home page and there already is a D binding:

 http://curl.haxx.se/libcurl/d/

 This one uses the htod tool to make a declaration module from the
 libcurl headers and creates a curldef.d file.

 In addition to this it defines a normal D class (libcurl.d) that wraps
 only the basic curl functionality in order to provide a nicer interface.

 I haven't created a declaration module before so my question is whether
 this would also be the right approach for a module in phobos 'etc'?

 /Jonas


I found that link too in my searches but it's been dead for a good 
while. I thought it has gotten dark. We could of course use it if we 
secure author's permission.

Andrei
Mar 01 2011
prev sibling parent reply Adam Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
I've made a very simple curl wrapper:

http://arsdnet.net/dcode/curl.d

It is meant to provide trivial get and post support:

string response = curl("http://mywebsite.com"); // contains the response

curl("http://mywebsite.com", "var=something&v2=moe"); // do a POST


There's functions in my module to do cookies and other things too,
but those functions are kinda ugly. (I just whipped them together to
work without worrying about beauty.)
Feb 25 2011
parent Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 25/02/11 16.12, Adam Ruppe wrote:

 I've made a very simple curl wrapper:

 http://arsdnet.net/dcode/curl.d

 It is meant to provide trivial get and post support:

 string response = curl("http://mywebsite.com"); // contains the response

 curl("http://mywebsite.com", "var=something&v2=moe"); // do a POST


 There's functions in my module to do cookies and other things too,
 but those functions are kinda ugly. (I just whipped them together to
 work without worrying about beauty.)


I'll have a look at it.

Thanks,
/Jonas
Feb 26 2011