RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Under Discussion] New Curl URL API
| From: | Jeffrey Dafoe | Date: | Fri, 24 Jun 2022 14:05:18 +0000 |
| Subject: | RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Under Discussion] New Curl URL API | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-118081@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hello Pierrick,
A thin wrapper would be the most flexible. Someone can always write a "friendlier" class
using your thin wrapper, as you mentioned, but one cannot easily go the other direction.
-Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Pierrick Charron <pierrick@php.net>
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 9:49 AM
To: Levi Morrison <levi.morrison@datadoghq.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Under Discussion] New Curl URL API
Hi all, and thanks Levi for your feedback,
If you look at the first thread (Discussion about new Curl URL API and ext/curl improvements)
you'll see that this was my first approach. I even proposed to "OOPify" the actual
CurlHandle & co objects with "simple"
methods like $ch->setOpt(). Anyone who reads the actual API can see this is the actual
"philosophy" of the extension. It was designed (on purpose or
not) as a thin wrapper over curl. But lets focus on URL API only !
With previous thread answers, I was under the impression that I really was the only one liking the
approach of following the cURL api as much as possible and leaving the more high level API to things
like Guzzle & co (for example by adding an Implementation of PSR-7 UriInterface using this
API) since all the others parts of the API are done this way. I think it's important to have
this new Curl URL API in 8.2 since it fixes security issues and that's of course not ideal but
I would rather have an implementation that would not be my first choice, than not having it at all.
What do you think ? I would love more people to give feedback on what they are expecting, if they
don't care if they prefer one approach or the other and of course why ? I was thinking about
doing a vote on this, but I'm not sure it's a good idea. What do you all think ?
Regards,
Pierrick
Le jeu. 23 juin 2022, à 12 h 49, Levi Morrison <levi.morrison@datadoghq.com> a écrit :
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 10:38 PM Pierrick Charron <pierrick@php.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Following our discussions we had on the subject of the new Curl URL
> > API, and other curl improvements. I decided to only focus on adding
> > the new
> Curl
> > URL API and put aside all other improvements. Here is the RFC that
> reflects
> > our current conversations.
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/curl-url-api
> >
> > Feel free to give any feedback, concern or support :-)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Pierrick
>
> IMO, this should mirror the low-level curl url API very directly. The
> basis of my opinion is that we do not own libcurl; we are merely
> adapting it for use in PHP. We cannot anticipate changes in their
> design, nor do we have authority to do so if we feel something should
> change. Touching it as little as possible makes it easier to track
> upstream changes, etc.
>
> Based on that, I think the naming should be closer to libcurl.:
> - CurlUrl::URL_ENCODE should be CurlUrl::URLENCODE
> - CurlUrl::URL_DECODE should be CurlUrl::URLDECODE
>
> And so on, only differing if necessary because something is a reserved
> word. The API should be as exact as possible to what libcurl provides.
> The "helpers" getHost, getPassword, etc should be removed and should
> expose
curl_url_get more directly.
>
> Of course, it should be object based instead of resource based, but
> that's it.
>
> A nicer API can be built on top of it, but I don't think that's the
> role this particular API should play.
>