From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2008-08-28 07:54:16
|
Hi Glyn! On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...> wrote: > Hi Dean and Divye, > > 2008/8/28 Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> >> >> >> This is the intended interpretation which I was going for. :-) > > In my mind, you send a GET to a server, not the client. When I write code > like this I *am* the client, I don't *use* a client. If I'm the only one > being anal about this then I'll let this point go :) > Right, no you're not being anal I think you have a perfectly good point. :-) In this case I think the http::client is more a meta-client (client for a client), or a 'slave' (I'm tempted to use the terms 'robot' or 'device') which is ordered to do things on behalf of a user (in this context, the user is the application that's using the client). We can term this as another layer of indirection, which insulates the user (application) from the dynamics of the protocol implementation (connections, message formats, etc.). >> >> I hope at least this can make it into the documentation or in a >> rationale document somehow... ;-) > > Yep, this was why I opened this subject. > Great! :D >> >> HTH! > > It does, thanks. My pleasure. :) -- Dean Michael C. Berris Software Engineer, Friendster, Inc. |