From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2008-09-03 09:36:04
|
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Kim Gräsman <kim...@gm...> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 10:19, Dean Michael Berris > <mik...@gm...> wrote: >> >>> Are we getting closer? :) >> >> I personally think just marking it an expected failure on Windows with >> explicit documentation stating the rationale (citing the Python bug) >> would be sufficient. > > That's what I meant, sorry if I wasn't clear. > It's alright. :) > Now I understand what the test is there for, it didn't occur to me > earlier that there should be no difference between text/binary, except > /possibly/ for handling of line endings -- if the client treats them > both as binary, then that's good. Time to make the server do the same > ;-) > Right. :-) It would be good to have an HTTP Server part of the library, but it's something that I have yet to get to. Right now I'm still having fun with the client and implementing a client, and it's a good change of pace for me since I've been too involved in developing an HTTP Server from scratch as well for the longest time. ;-) > Thanks, > - Kim > Thank you too. :-) -- Dean Michael C. Berris Software Engineer, Friendster, Inc. |