From: Jeroen H. <vex...@gm...> - 2010-01-21 17:26:27
|
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 18:17, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Jeroen Habraken <vex...@gm...> wrote: >> >> It seems I missed two uint32_t's when moving to the uint16_t type for >> ports, I've attached a trivial patch which should fix this. The >> attached patch also updates the documentation and tests. >> > > Are these patches also on your fork? Those would be good to have > merged into the 0.5-devel line soon. No, they aren't, and I was about to ask. It might be easiest here if I create a couple of issues and attach the patches there. > BTW, are your changes ready to merge into 0.5-devel so I can test locally? Not really, there is still quite a bit of work to be done as I've described in the URI thread, and major functionality like the IP parsing is missing. As I have exams at the moment it's hard to tell when I have time to work on this. The current code in my fork should compile and run though, and I'd like your opinion on the way I implemented the derived HTTP class in my fork. Also, my code breaks some of the current code, it seems mostly from the transition from protocol() to scheme(), so those need to be fixed. > -- > Dean Michael Berris > cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris > linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com > Sorry, attached the wrong patch, this one will actually fix the documentation and tests. Jeroen |