Joshua Hoblitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I've been kicking around the idea for this module for a few days now > and I'd like to commit it to code. The module I'm proposing would > be called C<HTTP::Multipart>. It would accept an C<HTTP::Response> > object and determine if it indeed does contain a multipart HTTP > message. If it does then the passed object would be cloned once for > every part in the message and the 'Content-Length', 'Content-Type', > and 'Content-Range' headers would be adjusted along with the > C<content> value to reflect one of the parts. Then a list of > non-multipart C<HTTP::Response> objects would be returned. I > believe this would simplify handling multipart responses. > > 1) Is this a good idea?
The usecase for this seems a bit unclear to me. How would you use this module? I don't understand what needs handling of multipart responses requires. > 2) Is HTTP::Multipart a good name? I think all that would be needed for this is a method on HTTP::Message. It could for instance be called 'parts'. If the method is not too long and generally useful then it should just go into that module. > 3) Is it appropriate to require C<HTTP::Response> objects? Would > just requiring objects to be ISA C<HTTP::Message> or > C<HTTP::Headers> be better? It is best not to require any specific object at all. Just depend to a certain interface, i.e. a set of methods to be implemented. > 4) Should there be an C<HTTP::Multipart> object that contains a list > of modified C<HTTP::Response> objects or would a class method be > sufficient? What you described above appear to be a simple function that takes one HTTP::Response (or HTTP::Message) and breaks it into (possibly) many smaller. I don't see any need for an extra object or class here. > 5) if a class method is sufficient, would should it's name be? > (ie., C<parase>?) What does 'parase' mean? Regards, Gisle
