Re: [PEPr] Comment on System::System_Socket
| From: | Michael Wallner | Date: | Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:52:40 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [PEPr] Comment on System::System_Socket | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-27409@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Pepr wrote:
Jon Parise (http://pear.php.net/user/jon) has commented on the proposal for System::System_Socket. Comment: This looks very good.Thanks!
However, I do wonder whether it would be possible to apply this new work to the existing Net_Socket class (and perhaps release it as Net_Socket2?).Well, I guess it could be done, but don't take me wrong, this rather sounds like an excuse for not fixing existing Net_Socket for over half a year now. I'd for shure do the needed work on Net_Socket if the leads of the package are not willing/able to. I'm wondering why this rather simple but severe bug # 87 has not been fixed before getting stuck in the discussion on why (not) to rtrim data in readLine()? Sorry for the rant, but this particular issue is one typical of those needlessly rendering PEAR ridiculous. Dispite that I also guess that PHPs builtin stream wrappers don't apply to sockets/connections created with System_Socket, so a SSL connection could not be established. However, I've no problem being educated :)
Proposal information: http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=49Regards, Michael