On 2/18/17 10:20 PM, Seb wrote:
On Monday, 9 May 2016 at 10:44:13 UTC, ZombineDev wrote:
On Monday, 9 May 2016 at 09:35:18 UTC, sigod wrote:
On Monday, 9 May 2016 at 08:55:36 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
But given that std.net.curl handles stuff like SSL/TLS, we _can't_
actually replace all of its functionality - at least not without
adding a dependency on a different C library, since there's no way
that it's sane to do the crypto stuff ourselves without a crypto
expert, and even then, we should think twice about it. I could see
implementing the SSL/TLS protocols themselves but not the crypto
they use. If we replace std.net.curl, we likely should just provide
the basic HTTP functionality, and leave the rest to a dub package
that we move std.net.curl to.

Any chances that we can produce good crypto code over time? And
verify it with experts, of course.

https://github.com/etcimon/botan AFAIK, it is already used in
production by its author, in combination with libasync + vibe.d +
http2 for a full stack D solution.


So what's the consensus on this issue?
Can't we simply move std.net.curl and etc.c.curl to undead and just
_not_ include it in Phobos?
Anyone reasonable will use requests [1], vibe.d's async requestHTTP [2]
or their home-grown library anyways. As mentioned in another thread [3],
Phobos is bloated with "old" modules that wouldn't have made it through
today's review process.

For some time I was a proponent of yanking stuff from Phobos into oblivion. Now I'm not. Stop breaking code. Yes, we should think harder before introducing libraries into Phobos but continuing on with removal of stuff just introduces the continuous churn for no adequate benefit.

What would anyone get from std.net.curl removal? Are you going to find all of D programs and patch them to use something else?

Yes, Phobos is full of historical accidents and cruft. I'm constantly tempted to propose Phobos v2 properly _designed_ (not *grown*) and without the junk. I really think it might be a good idea but only when we actually know what a proper design looks like.

---
Dmitry Olshansky

Reply via email to