Menu
▾
▴
cpp-netlib-devel — Developers Mailing List
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2007 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(52) |
Jun
(30) |
Jul
(17) |
Aug
(9) |
Sep
(4) |
Oct
(7) |
Nov
(11) |
Dec
(19) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(37) |
Apr
(28) |
May
(15) |
Jun
(28) |
Jul
(7) |
Aug
(125) |
Sep
(116) |
Oct
(85) |
Nov
(14) |
Dec
(6) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(11) |
Feb
(4) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
|
May
(9) |
Jun
(5) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(40) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(19) |
Nov
(43) |
Dec
(45) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(76) |
Feb
(95) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(23) |
May
(39) |
Jun
(54) |
Jul
(6) |
Aug
(13) |
Sep
(12) |
Oct
(59) |
Nov
(53) |
Dec
(43) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(43) |
Feb
(44) |
Mar
(25) |
Apr
(23) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(5) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
|
| 2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(6) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Ivan J. <ijo...@gm...> - 2010-06-07 17:40:39
|
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 7:01 AM, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...>wrote: > On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 1:11 AM, Ivan Johannessen <ijo...@gm...> > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Dean Michael Berris < > mik...@gm...> > > wrote: > >> > >> What version did you download? > >> > > I downloaded the 0.6.1 tag and pulled in the changes from the 0.7 branch > > that allowed me to compile without SSL support. > > Cool. > > >> > >> In the case of the example, I don't think it adds the > >> "follow_redirects" constructor option. I'll dig into it later but can > >> you check whether the response is an HTTP 200 or an HTTP 302? > >> > > The http_client.cpp do follow redirects and the response is a HTTP/1.1 > > response with status 200. This issue is by no means a show stopper for me > > but I pointed it out because I believe it is in disagreement of the > > RFC: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616.html > > I could not find anything in the RFC that stated that a response without > a > > body "should" or "must" contain either headers. > > > > That's odd, you don't get a body from the HTTP 200 OK response from > www.google.com? > > That is correct. > Conforming HTTP 1.1 servers should use an HTTP 204 No Content response > instead if it doesn't intend to send a body. Although an HTTP 200 OK > should have either a "Content-Length" or "Transfer-Encoding: chunked" > last time I checked. > > I'll try to look deeper into this though, thanks for reporting. > > Ah, looks like google is not doing the right thing. Thanks for a great lib. I'll be using it in a cross platform(Windows/OSX/Linux) app soon. Ivan > -- > Dean Michael Berris > deanberris.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate > GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the > lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo > _______________________________________________ > Cpp-netlib-devel mailing list > Cpp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cpp-netlib-devel > |
|
From: Nelson, E. - 2 <eri...@ba...> - 2010-06-07 14:28:57
|
Dean Michael Berris wrote: > And it's there. :) Yay! Now I won't have to separately maintain that file any more. > Sorry for the late update, weekend family time currently trumps > opensource development. No need to be sorry, family's more important. Erik |
|
From: Kim G. <kim...@gm...> - 2010-06-06 15:04:14
|
Erik, On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 16:49, Nelson, Erik - 2 <eri...@ba...> wrote: > Kim Gräsman wrote: > >> +1 for the symbolic notation from me! (<-- I like it so much I even >> managed to get it into this e-mail :) > > I'm not clear on this... are you negating the +1? I'm too tired to think of a witty response -- so to be clear: no. :) - Kim |
|
From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-06-06 14:01:38
|
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 1:11 AM, Ivan Johannessen <ijo...@gm...> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> > wrote: >> >> What version did you download? >> > I downloaded the 0.6.1 tag and pulled in the changes from the 0.7 branch > that allowed me to compile without SSL support. Cool. >> >> In the case of the example, I don't think it adds the >> "follow_redirects" constructor option. I'll dig into it later but can >> you check whether the response is an HTTP 200 or an HTTP 302? >> > The http_client.cpp do follow redirects and the response is a HTTP/1.1 > response with status 200. This issue is by no means a show stopper for me > but I pointed it out because I believe it is in disagreement of the > RFC: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616.html > I could not find anything in the RFC that stated that a response without a > body "should" or "must" contain either headers. > That's odd, you don't get a body from the HTTP 200 OK response from www.google.com? Conforming HTTP 1.1 servers should use an HTTP 204 No Content response instead if it doesn't intend to send a body. Although an HTTP 200 OK should have either a "Content-Length" or "Transfer-Encoding: chunked" last time I checked. I'll try to look deeper into this though, thanks for reporting. -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com |
|
From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-06-06 13:54:46
|
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Darren Garvey <dar...@gm...> wrote: > On 5 June 2010 14:03, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> wrote: >> >> Change committed locally, please expect an update on the branch soon. > > Looking forward to it. > And it's there. :) Sorry for the late update, weekend family time currently trumps opensource development. Have a great one guys! -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com |
|
From: Ivan J. <ijo...@gm...> - 2010-06-05 17:11:51
|
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...>wrote: > Hi Ivan, > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Ivan Johannessen > <ijo...@gm...> wrote: > > Hi Dean, > > I've just downloaded library and built the http_client.cpp sample. > > What version did you download? > > I downloaded the 0.6.1 tag and pulled in the changes from the 0.7 branch that allowed me to compile without SSL support. > > Testing > > it out by giving it the URL: http://www.google.com results in a "Missing > > Transfer Encoding" exception. Looking the code in > sync_connection_base.hpp I > > see that either a Content-Length or Transfer-Encoding header is required. > > However, the response fromwww.google.com does not contain a message > body(I > > assume because the Connection:close header was included in the request), > > thus the presence of either of those headers are optional. Thoughts? > > Actually I would say it's because the client in the HTTP example > doesn't follow directs automatically (IIRC). I need to check this. > > The 0.6.1 version has an HTTP client that is HTTP/1.1 compliant and > thus should support already HTTP/1.0 responses from servers. In the > HTTP/1.1 spec, the server's HTTP/1.1 response *should* contain either > a Transfer-Encoding header, or a Content-Length header. > > In the case of the example, I don't think it adds the > "follow_redirects" constructor option. I'll dig into it later but can > you check whether the response is an HTTP 200 or an HTTP 302? > > The http_client.cpp do follow redirects and the response is a HTTP/1.1 response with status 200. This issue is by no means a show stopper for me but I pointed it out because I believe it is in disagreement of the RFC: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616.html I could not find anything in the RFC that stated that a response without a body "should" or "must" contain either headers. > Thanks and I hope this helps! > > -- > Dean Michael Berris > deanberris.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate > GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the > lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo > _______________________________________________ > Cpp-netlib-devel mailing list > Cpp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cpp-netlib-devel > |
|
From: Darren G. <dar...@gm...> - 2010-06-05 14:18:02
|
On 5 June 2010 14:03, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Darren Garvey <dar...@gm...> > wrote: > > > > On 4 June 2010 05:57, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> > wrote: > >> > >> Expect me to change this to: > >> > >> BOOST_NETWORK_ENABLE_HTTPS > >> > >> In my next push. > >> > >> Thanks to you, Erik, and Fernando for giving me enough reasons to > >> change this and actually do it. :) > > > > Cool! This is a bit of a pain each time I clean out my PC. Any barriers > to > > entry are best avoided, so this is a good move. > > > > Thanks, I'm in the final stages of testing and pushing in a few. > Change committed locally, please expect an update on the branch soon. > Looking forward to it. Cheers, Darren |
|
From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-06-05 13:04:25
|
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Darren Garvey <dar...@gm...> wrote: > > On 4 June 2010 05:57, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> wrote: >> >> Expect me to change this to: >> >> BOOST_NETWORK_ENABLE_HTTPS >> >> In my next push. >> >> Thanks to you, Erik, and Fernando for giving me enough reasons to >> change this and actually do it. :) > > Cool! This is a bit of a pain each time I clean out my PC. Any barriers to > entry are best avoided, so this is a good move. > Thanks, I'm in the final stages of testing and pushing in a few. Change committed locally, please expect an update on the branch soon. Have a great weekend everyone! -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com |
|
From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-06-05 02:53:06
|
Hi Ivan, On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Ivan Johannessen <ijo...@gm...> wrote: > Hi Dean, > I've just downloaded library and built the http_client.cpp sample. What version did you download? > Testing > it out by giving it the URL: http://www.google.com results in a "Missing > Transfer Encoding" exception. Looking the code in sync_connection_base.hpp I > see that either a Content-Length or Transfer-Encoding header is required. > However, the response fromwww.google.com does not contain a message body(I > assume because the Connection:close header was included in the request), > thus the presence of either of those headers are optional. Thoughts? Actually I would say it's because the client in the HTTP example doesn't follow directs automatically (IIRC). I need to check this. The 0.6.1 version has an HTTP client that is HTTP/1.1 compliant and thus should support already HTTP/1.0 responses from servers. In the HTTP/1.1 spec, the server's HTTP/1.1 response *should* contain either a Transfer-Encoding header, or a Content-Length header. In the case of the example, I don't think it adds the "follow_redirects" constructor option. I'll dig into it later but can you check whether the response is an HTTP 200 or an HTTP 302? Thanks and I hope this helps! -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com |
|
From: Ivan J. <ijo...@gm...> - 2010-06-04 16:51:16
|
Hi Dean, I've just downloaded library and built the http_client.cpp sample. Testing it out by giving it the URL: http://www.google.com results in a "Missing Transfer Encoding" exception. Looking the code in sync_connection_base.hpp I see that either a Content-Length or Transfer-Encoding header is required. However, the response fromwww.google.com does not contain a message body(I assume because the Connection:close header was included in the request), thus the presence of either of those headers are optional. Thoughts? Ivan Johannessen |
|
From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-06-04 14:54:51
|
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Fernando Pelliccioni <fpe...@gm...> wrote: > > But the example I sent compiles and works! > Yes, actually I checked the code and 0.6.1 should have that fixed. Is that not the case for you? -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com |
|
From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-06-04 14:53:06
|
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 <eri...@ba...> wrote: > Kim Gräsman wrote: > >> +1 for the symbolic notation from me! (<-- I like it so much I even >> managed to get it into this e-mail :) > > I'm not clear on this... are you negating the +1? > > :D > Oh that was fast. :P -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com |
|
From: Nelson, E. - 2 <eri...@ba...> - 2010-06-04 14:49:51
|
Kim Gräsman wrote: > +1 for the symbolic notation from me! (<-- I like it so much I even > managed to get it into this e-mail :) I'm not clear on this... are you negating the +1? :D Erik |
|
From: Fernando P. <fpe...@gm...> - 2010-06-04 13:02:48
|
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 < eri...@ba...> wrote: > Fernando Pelliccioni wrote: > > It is not a bug. The following code compiles well on MSVC 9 (Visual > Studio 2008) > > You just have to include <ciso646> > > It is a bug- 'and', 'not', etc. are reserved words in C++, and MSVC9 is > nonconformant when it #defines them as preprocessor macros. It cause > troubles lots of places, not just here. > > > It is true, there are reserved words This is from the Current Standard ISO/IEC 14882:2003(E) --- *Furthermore, the alternative representations shown in Table 4 for certain operators and punctuators (2.5) are reserved and shall not be used otherwise: Table 4—alternative representations __ ______________________________________________________ and and_eq bitand bitor compl not not_eq or or_eq xor xor_eq _ _______________________________________________________ * --- But the example I sent compiles and works! Regards, Fernando. > Here's a link that discusses it further. > > http://books.google.com/books?id=Q4iP1mkfdtsC&pg=PT398&lpg=PT398&dq=ciso > 646&source=bl&ots=wYn89ESX6p&sig=YJ9ZKxHVhGctK3_ruaAEuHYnRnM&hl=en&ei=q- > MHTLCWGYWclgesspWADw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CDoQ6AE > wBw#v=onepage&q=ciso646&f=false<http://books.google.com/books?id=Q4iP1mkfdtsC&pg=PT398&lpg=PT398&dq=ciso%0A646&source=bl&ots=wYn89ESX6p&sig=YJ9ZKxHVhGctK3_ruaAEuHYnRnM&hl=en&ei=q-%0AMHTLCWGYWclgesspWADw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CDoQ6AE%0AwBw#v=onepage&q=ciso646&f=false> > > Erik > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate > GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the > lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo > _______________________________________________ > Cpp-netlib-devel mailing list > Cpp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cpp-netlib-devel > |
|
From: Darren G. <dar...@gm...> - 2010-06-04 07:47:37
|
Hey Dean, On 4 June 2010 05:57, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:37 AM, Matt Trentini <mat...@gm...> > wrote: > > > I'm not of a strong opinion either way but, in particular, I suspect > > that the most common complaint we'll face from devs new to cpp-netlib > > is that "the code doesn't compile" because they didn't know to add a > > #define or a dependency to OpenSSL. > > > > Yeah, especially on Windows. > > I think I'll just fix that and make it an opt-in feature instead -- > just because I'm tired of fighting it and I think limiting the > requirements on non-Boost libraries would be a good thing. > > Expect me to change this to: > > BOOST_NETWORK_ENABLE_HTTPS > > In my next push. > > Thanks to you, Erik, and Fernando for giving me enough reasons to > change this and actually do it. :) > Cool! This is a bit of a pain each time I clean out my PC. Any barriers to entry are best avoided, so this is a good move. Cheers, Darren |
|
From: Kim G. <kim...@gm...> - 2010-06-04 05:33:45
|
Hey Dean, On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 06:53, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> wrote: > > Yeah, but I like English more personally. Again, it's really easy to > fix and I just might do that if there's overwhelming opinion in > support for the symbolic version versus the (standards-compliant) > English-ish version. +1 for the symbolic notation from me! (<-- I like it so much I even managed to get it into this e-mail :) - Kim |
|
From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-06-04 04:57:57
|
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:37 AM, Matt Trentini <mat...@gm...> wrote: > Heya Dean, > >> Yes, I'm working on it at the moment. On the 0.7-devel branch, I shall >> be pushing soon a fix that allows users to define the >> BOOST_NETWORK_NO_HTTPS .... > > Great, thanks for this! > You're welcome. :) > But have you considered making HTTPS an opt-in feature instead? So > you'd have to define BOOST_NETWORK_HTTPS to *allow* HTTPS connections. > I have, and the code's really set up to make that easy to change. > I'm not of a strong opinion either way but, in particular, I suspect > that the most common complaint we'll face from devs new to cpp-netlib > is that "the code doesn't compile" because they didn't know to add a > #define or a dependency to OpenSSL. > Yeah, especially on Windows. I think I'll just fix that and make it an opt-in feature instead -- just because I'm tired of fighting it and I think limiting the requirements on non-Boost libraries would be a good thing. Expect me to change this to: BOOST_NETWORK_ENABLE_HTTPS In my next push. Thanks to you, Erik, and Fernando for giving me enough reasons to change this and actually do it. :) -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com |
|
From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-06-04 04:53:37
|
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Matt Trentini <mat...@gm...> wrote: >>> Why not do >>> if ( ! boost::iequals(parts.scheme.substr(0, 5), "https") ) >>> instead of >>> if ( not boost::iequals(parts.scheme.substr(0, 5), "https") ) >> >> I prefer the second way- it's more expressive and it's standards-compliant. This is a bug in the Microsoft compiler. > > Dean's right, it's a matter of taste; I prefer it the first way. :) > > IMO, it's no less expressive and that use is far more common - and > better understood - in the C++ domain. > Yeah, but I like English more personally. Again, it's really easy to fix and I just might do that if there's overwhelming opinion in support for the symbolic version versus the (standards-compliant) English-ish version. -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com |
|
From: Nelson, E. - 2 <eri...@ba...> - 2010-06-04 01:43:57
|
Matt Trentini wrote: > But have you considered making HTTPS an opt-in feature instead? So > you'd have to define BOOST_NETWORK_HTTPS to *allow* HTTPS connections. > I'm not of a strong opinion either way but, in particular, I suspect > that the most common complaint we'll face from devs new to cpp-netlib > is that "the code doesn't compile" because they didn't know to add a > #define or a dependency to OpenSSL. +1 from me. OpenSSL might be installed by default on every GNU/Linux box, but it's not installed at all on most Windows C++ development machines. Our hello_world programs should "just work", in my opinion. Erik |
|
From: Matt T. <mat...@gm...> - 2010-06-03 23:37:25
|
Heya Dean, > Yes, I'm working on it at the moment. On the 0.7-devel branch, I shall > be pushing soon a fix that allows users to define the > BOOST_NETWORK_NO_HTTPS .... Great, thanks for this! But have you considered making HTTPS an opt-in feature instead? So you'd have to define BOOST_NETWORK_HTTPS to *allow* HTTPS connections. I'm not of a strong opinion either way but, in particular, I suspect that the most common complaint we'll face from devs new to cpp-netlib is that "the code doesn't compile" because they didn't know to add a #define or a dependency to OpenSSL. Cheers, Matt |
|
From: Matt T. <mat...@gm...> - 2010-06-03 23:29:38
|
>> Why not do >> if ( ! boost::iequals(parts.scheme.substr(0, 5), "https") ) >> instead of >> if ( not boost::iequals(parts.scheme.substr(0, 5), "https") ) > > I prefer the second way- it's more expressive and it's standards-compliant. This is a bug in the Microsoft compiler. Dean's right, it's a matter of taste; I prefer it the first way. :) IMO, it's no less expressive and that use is far more common - and better understood - in the C++ domain. |
|
From: Nelson, E. - 2 <eri...@ba...> - 2010-06-03 17:25:45
|
Fernando Pelliccioni wrote: > It is not a bug. The following code compiles well on MSVC 9 (Visual Studio 2008) > You just have to include <ciso646> Sorry for the long URL... here's a shorter one http://bit.ly/8ZI4z3 |
|
From: Nelson, E. - 2 <eri...@ba...> - 2010-06-03 17:23:21
|
Fernando Pelliccioni wrote: > It is not a bug. The following code compiles well on MSVC 9 (Visual Studio 2008) > You just have to include <ciso646> It is a bug- 'and', 'not', etc. are reserved words in C++, and MSVC9 is nonconformant when it #defines them as preprocessor macros. It cause troubles lots of places, not just here. Here's a link that discusses it further. http://books.google.com/books?id=Q4iP1mkfdtsC&pg=PT398&lpg=PT398&dq=ciso 646&source=bl&ots=wYn89ESX6p&sig=YJ9ZKxHVhGctK3_ruaAEuHYnRnM&hl=en&ei=q- MHTLCWGYWclgesspWADw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CDoQ6AE wBw#v=onepage&q=ciso646&f=false Erik |
|
From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-06-03 16:15:41
|
Hi Fernando, On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Fernando Pelliccioni <fpe...@gm...> wrote: [snip] > Please don't top-post -- it's getting hard to follow discussions if your response is above the message you're responding to. Please keep the context required and respond in-line so that we have nice archives and would allow others to easily follow the discussion. Thanks -- this also serves as a reminder to everyone (those abiding and not abiding). :) Have a great one guys! -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com |
|
From: Fernando P. <fpe...@gm...> - 2010-06-03 15:59:55
|
It is not a bug. The following code compiles well on MSVC 9 (Visual Studio
2008)
// -- begin code
#include <iostream>
#include <ciso646>
int main()
{
bool temp = true;
if ( not temp )
{
std::cout << "it's is false" << std::endl;
}
else
{
std::cout << "it's is true" << std::endl;
}
return 0;
}
// -- end
You just have to include <ciso646>
Regards,
Fernando.
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 <
eri...@ba...> wrote:
> Fernando Pelliccioni wrote:
>
> > Why not do
> > if ( ! boost::iequals(parts.scheme.substr(0, 5), "https") )
> > instead of
> > if ( not boost::iequals(parts.scheme.substr(0, 5), "https") )
>
> I prefer the second way- it's more expressive and it's standards-compliant.
> This is a bug in the Microsoft compiler.
>
> Erik
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
> GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
> lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
> _______________________________________________
> Cpp-netlib-devel mailing list
> Cpp...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cpp-netlib-devel
>
|
7 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
