cpp-netlib-devel Mailing List for C++ Network Library (Page 37)

Status: Alpha

Brought to you by: glynos, mikedickey, mikhail_beris

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

Flat | Threaded

<< < 1 .. 35 36 37 38 39 .. 57 > >> (Page 37 of 57)

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] URI processing (Was Re: Work Left)

From: K. G. <kim...@gm...> - 2008-10-09 07:07:49

Hi guys,

On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 00:25, Dean Michael Berris
<mik...@gm...> wrote:
>
>> Nice. I'll play around with it, time permitting. I'm on parental
>> leave, so my daily schedule is highly dependent on the whims of my
>> one-year-old :-)
>
> Sweet. :) If you need any help on directives, you can look at how I do
> it with the network::message implementation.

Yes, I've looked at it a bit already, thanks.

> One thing we can do is simply use a Boost.Fusion associative sequence
> (a fusion map) like we do now to build and store the URI parts in the
> HTTP request's 'uri' method.
>
> If you think about it, we just need to generalize the URI parsing and
> it shouldn't be hard to factor this out.

I've already factored this out into a simplistic uri class, but no
directive support yet.

Not sure I can cook anything up with any speed, but I'm experimenting...

- Kim

[cpp-netlib-devel] Python server tests (Was: URI processing)

From: K. G. <kim...@gm...> - 2008-10-09 07:04:44

Hi Dean,

Quick one first;

On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 00:25, Dean Michael Berris
<mik...@gm...> wrote:
>
> If we can do it real soon (along with fixing the Python server tests)
> maybe 0.3 will be a more jam-packed release than what I originally
> envisioned. ;-)

I thought the Python tests were working on Linux now -- what's failing?

- Kim

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] URI processing (Was Re: Work Left)

From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2008-10-08 22:25:08

Hey Guys!

Sorry I was out for a bit. Personal health issues aside, I should be
back on track.

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 4:30 AM, Kim Gräsman <kim...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi Glyn,
>
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 13:19, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...> wrote:
>>
>> boost::network::uri uri("http//www.boost.org/path");
>> uri << query("x=5") << query("y=6");
>>
>> Or:
>> boost::network::uri boost_org("http//www.boost.org/");
>> boost::network uri;
>> uri << boost_org << path("path") << query_param("x", 5);
>>
>> I think the directives can be considered as helpers, not really as *the* way
>> of building URIs.  Building URIs from strings will be most common.
>

I like this! :D

> Nice. I'll play around with it, time permitting. I'm on parental
> leave, so my daily schedule is highly dependent on the whims of my
> one-year-old :-)

Sweet. :) If you need any help on directives, you can look at how I do
it with the network::message implementation.

One thing we can do is simply use a Boost.Fusion associative sequence
(a fusion map) like we do now to build and store the URI parts in the
HTTP request's 'uri' method.

If you think about it, we just need to generalize the URI parsing and
it shouldn't be hard to factor this out.

If we can do it real soon (along with fixing the Python server tests)
maybe 0.3 will be a more jam-packed release than what I originally
envisioned. ;-)

-- 
Dean Michael C. Berris
Software Engineer, Friendster, Inc.

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] URI processing (Was Re: Work Left)

From: K. G. <kim...@gm...> - 2008-10-07 20:30:57

Hi Glyn,

On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 13:19, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...> wrote:
>
> boost::network::uri uri("http//www.boost.org/path");
> uri << query("x=5") << query("y=6");
>
> Or:
> boost::network::uri boost_org("http//www.boost.org/");
> boost::network uri;
> uri << boost_org << path("path") << query_param("x", 5);
>
> I think the directives can be considered as helpers, not really as *the* way
> of building URIs.  Building URIs from strings will be most common.

Nice. I'll play around with it, time permitting. I'm on parental
leave, so my daily schedule is highly dependent on the whims of my
one-year-old :-)

- Kim

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] URI processing (Was Re: Work Left)

From: Glyn M. <gly...@gm...> - 2008-10-07 11:24:17

Hi,

2008/10/7 Kim Gräsman <kim...@gm...>

> Hi Glyn,
>
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 12:12, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...>
> wrote:
> >
> > I don't know if its worth the hassle of having a distinct class for each
> > scheme.  I was thinking about building URIs using directives in a similar
> > way to what we have with messages:
> >
> > boost::network::uri uri;
> > uri << scheme("http")
> >     << authority("www.boost.org")
> >     << path("path")
> >     << query("x=5")
> >     << fragment("bananas")
> >     ;
>
> It looks nice in a way, but I'm not sure how often you start with
> components and want to join them into a URI? I think the usual use
> case is you have a URI string and want to modify parts of it. But this
> API would allow that too, I suppose.


Yeah, you could always accept a string in the constructor arguments:
boost::network::uri uri("http//www.boost.org/path?x=5#bananas");

Or:
boost::network::uri uri("http//www.boost.org/path");
uri << query("x=5") << query("y=6");

Or:
boost::network::uri boost_org("http//www.boost.org/");
boost::network uri;
uri << boost_org << path("path") << query_param("x", 5);

I think the directives can be considered as helpers, not really as *the* way
of building URIs.  Building URIs from strings will be most common.

G

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] URI processing (Was Re: Work Left)

From: K. G. <kim...@gm...> - 2008-10-07 10:58:12

Hi Glyn,

On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 12:12, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...> wrote:
>
> I don't know if its worth the hassle of having a distinct class for each
> scheme.  I was thinking about building URIs using directives in a similar
> way to what we have with messages:
>
> boost::network::uri uri;
> uri << scheme("http")
>     << authority("www.boost.org")
>     << path("path")
>     << query("x=5")
>     << fragment("bananas")
>     ;

It looks nice in a way, but I'm not sure how often you start with
components and want to join them into a URI? I think the usual use
case is you have a URI string and want to modify parts of it. But this
API would allow that too, I suppose.

> Is this too simplistic?  Do you see any problems with this approach?

Depending on the variance of URIs, though, this might not be
simplistic enough :-)

I think there may be enough format variance to justify a
directive-based model, rather than just a simple data class, though.
Interesting.

- Kim

[cpp-netlib-devel] URI processing (Was Re: Work Left)

From: Glyn M. <gly...@gm...> - 2008-10-07 10:23:08

Kim,

2008/10/7 Kim Gräsman <kim...@gm...>

> I think I was having problems with the different shapes of different
> types of URIs, and that each scheme should probably be represented by
> its own class. I'm not sure, for example, what the HTTP client should
> do if it's presented with an FTP URL.
>

I don't know if its worth the hassle of having a distinct class for each
scheme.  I was thinking about building URIs using directives in a similar
way to what we have with messages:

boost::network::uri uri;
uri << scheme("http")
    << authority("www.boost.org")
    << path("path")
    << query("x=5")
    << fragment("bananas")
    ;
boost::network::http::request request(uri);
OR
boost::network::http::request request(uri.string());

And for parsing:
std::string scheme = boost::network::uri::scheme(uri);
std::string authority = boost::network::uri::authority(uri);

etc.

Is this too simplistic?  Do you see any problems with this approach?

Glyn

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Work Left

From: K. G. <kim...@gm...> - 2008-10-07 08:47:30

Hi Glyn,

On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 10:19, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...> wrote:
>
>> For what it's worth, I've been experimenting with getting the uri
>> separated out of the request, but the more I look at it, the less
>> value I think it brings...
>
> Have you committed any code?

Nope, not yet.

> What do you mean by "less value"?  IMO it
> makes sense to separate the URI from the request, but I haven't given much
> thought to the details.

Looking at it again, maybe it isn't so bad :)

I think I was having problems with the different shapes of different
types of URIs, and that each scheme should probably be represented by
its own class. I'm not sure, for example, what the HTTP client should
do if it's presented with an FTP URL.

And does it make sense to send a string to to the HTTP client? Maybe
it should be a 'uri' or maybe it should be an 'http_uri'?

> Is it just difficult to do or do you just not think
> its worth it by design?

I definitely think it's worth doing, I'm just not sure I can find a
good abstraction at the moment, but we could start with a simple URI
and move from there, I suppose.

- Kim

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Work Left

From: Glyn M. <gly...@gm...> - 2008-10-07 08:34:11

Kim,

2008/10/7 Kim Gräsman <kim...@gm...>

> Hi guys,
>
> For what it's worth, I've been experimenting with getting the uri
> separated out of the request, but the more I look at it, the less
> value I think it brings...
>


Have you committed any code?  What do you mean by "less value"?  IMO it
makes sense to separate the URI from the request, but I haven't given much
thought to the details.  Is it just difficult to do or do you just not think
its worth it by design?

Thanks,
Glyn

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Work Left

From: K. G. <kim...@gm...> - 2008-10-07 07:47:51

Hi guys,

For what it's worth, I've been experimenting with getting the uri
separated out of the request, but the more I look at it, the less
value I think it brings...

- Kim

On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 10:46, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi Divye,
>
> 2008/10/5 Divye Kapoor <div...@gm...>
>>
>> Sorry Everyone,
>>    Got busy in college work, so I've been out of touch. I have some free
>> time this week. Can anyone tell me what work was remaining in the last
>> release and if its complete, what's next on the agenda?
>
> Examples :)  We could still do with some examples that demonstrate how to
> specialize the message type (think std::wstring and unordered containers).
>
> If you're ambitious you could take a look at implementing other protocols
> (FTP and SMTP might be useful and not too difficult).
>
> There's not so much of an agenda, but if you have time to contribute
> something and you have a good idea, feel free to do so.  I think Dean has
> more ideas if you need help.
>
> I have a bit of free time today, I'm going to develop some Python utilities
> to help manage releases.
>
> Regards,
> Glyn

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Work Left

From: Glyn M. <gly...@gm...> - 2008-10-06 08:47:27

Hi Divye,

2008/10/5 Divye Kapoor <div...@gm...>

> Sorry Everyone,
>    Got busy in college work, so I've been out of touch. I have some free
> time this week. Can anyone tell me what work was remaining in the last
> release and if its complete, what's next on the agenda?
>

Examples :)  We could still do with some examples that demonstrate how to
specialize the message type (think std::wstring and unordered containers).

If you're ambitious you could take a look at implementing other protocols
(FTP and SMTP might be useful and not too difficult).

There's not so much of an agenda, but if you have time to contribute
something and you have a good idea, feel free to do so.  I think Dean has
more ideas if you need help.

I have a bit of free time today, I'm going to develop some Python utilities
to help manage releases.

Regards,
Glyn

[cpp-netlib-devel] Work Left

From: Divye K. <div...@gm...> - 2008-10-05 20:17:37

Sorry Everyone,
   Got busy in college work, so I've been out of touch. I have some free
time this week. Can anyone tell me what work was remaining in the last
release and if its complete, what's next on the agenda?

Divye


-- 
An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a
cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup.
   H. L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
My official web site: http://people.iitr.ernet.in/shp/061305/
Webmaster: http://www.drkapoorsclinic.com
Blog: http://divyekapoor.blogspot.com