What about replacing some things like this with the tcllib equivalent or perhaps tclvfs?
> -----Original Message----- > From: AOLserver Discussion > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf > Of Andrew Piskorski > Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 3:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [AOLSERVER] http.tcl vs. https.tcl > > > The code in AOLserver's http.tcl and nsopenssl's https.tcl is mostly > identical - no surprise as Scott explictly says he basaed https.tcl on > http.tcl. However, from a code maintenance point of view, this is > awfully ugly. (Fixing the same bugs and adding the same features > twice, etc.) > > Suggestions on how this could or should be improved? Perhaps the > http.tcl shipped with AOLserver should simply be conditionalized to > provide both the http and https versions of the functions? > > -- > Andrew Piskorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://www.piskorski.com > > > -- > AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ > > To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the > body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can > leave the Subject: field of your email blank. > -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
