Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

> On 29 Jan 2015, at 12:18, Crypto Compress <cryptocompress@googlemail.com> wrote: > > >> * Why should we have our own HTTP API and not follow PSR-7? > > possible points: > - PHP-FIG propose no implementations; pecl_http does > - native implementations should be faster I don’t see how that’s relevant: I’m talking here about the API, not the implementation. Why should PHP’s HTTP API not be PSR-7? > - PHP-FIG focus on frameworks; pecl_http in core is useable without dependencies by every > simple script Also irrelevant, there’s no reason it couldn’t use PSR-7’s API. > - PSR-7 is a moving target; pecl_http exists for ten years Fair point. > - PSR-7 can be complementary to pecl_http not the other way around (c code can't use php > code?) Not necessarily true. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/