|
From: Rui N. C. <rn...@rn...> - 2004-03-07 23:29:33
|
Hi Christian, > > But you're right. It's not clear enough. I will fix that. That was an > implied assumption fault by me, because usually network protocols allow > this multi line behavior, because it doesn't make sense to establish a > new connection for every single network command. > It's not a question of just allowing multi-line/command or not, is also that "feature" that whether every command must be CRLF terminated. On my recent tests, your bison-based parser only recognizes a command if there's a CRLF terminator. If one's missing, you do nothing, don't even respond to a client that issues a single command but without terminating it with CRLF. It was this "undocumented" behaviour that I was referring to. Cheers, -- rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela rn...@rn... |