Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Michael Wallner wrote: > > On 06/02/15 17:44, Daniel Lowrey wrote: > > If you doubt that this is a solved problem in userland consider the > > performance of my own 100% userland HTTP client demonstrated here > > without the use of curl or any other extensions: > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

On 06/02/15 17:44, Daniel Lowrey wrote: > If you doubt that this is a solved problem in userland consider the > performance of my own 100% userland HTTP client demonstrated here > without the use of curl or any other extensions: > > https://gist.github.com/rdlowrey/54171625334670ccb9f5 I can repl

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

On 06/02/15 17:44, Daniel Lowrey wrote: >>> I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of the >>> things mentioned previously. >>> >>> I you still find anything lacking, please let me know, so I can > expand the >>> RFC accordingly. >>> >>> And of course, everything else is u

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

>> I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of the >> things mentioned previously. >> >> I you still find anything lacking, please let me know, so I can expand the >> RFC accordingly. >> >> And of course, everything else is up for discussion. >> I may not have been clear b

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

Hi Stas! On 30/01/15 20:10, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > >> I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of the >> things mentioned previously. > > Thank you, Michael, this is much better! > > I would still like to hear more about 2 extensions, especially about > raph

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

Hi! > I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of the > things mentioned previously. Thank you, Michael, this is much better! I would still like to hear more about 2 extensions, especially about raphf - it seems to be some framework for handling persistent resources, bu

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

"Michael Wallner" wrote in message news:bd568277-5a74-4a66-ac5d-173da93fa...@php.net... <> I think PHP is, and should be, a language where you’re more successful in getting things done, instead of having to do it right in one way only. Well said! I couldn't agree more. -- Tony Marston

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

Hi Daniel! > On 30 01 2015, at 07:28, Daniel Lowrey wrote: > > Hi Mike :) > > I'd like to chime in on the discussion ... > > > 1. There is a lot of *really* useful functionality in pecl/http that IMO > should be bundled with the standard PHP distribution. > > This, to me, means things like p

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

Hi all, On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Crypto Compress < cryptocompr...@googlemail.com> wrote: > possible points: > - PHP-FIG propose no implementations; pecl_http does > - PHP-FIG focus on frameworks; pecl_http in core is useable without > dependencies by every simple script > - PSR-7 is a mov

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

On 1/29/15 6:40 AM, Andrea Faulds wrote: On 29 Jan 2015, at 12:18, Crypto Compress wrote: * Why should we have our own HTTP API and not follow PSR-7? possible points: - PHP-FIG propose no implementations; pecl_http does - native implementations should be faster I don’t see how that’s re

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

> On 29 Jan 2015, at 12:18, Crypto Compress > wrote: > > >> * Why should we have our own HTTP API and not follow PSR-7? > > possible points: > - PHP-FIG propose no implementations; pecl_http does > - native implementations should be faster I don’t see how that’s relevant: I’m talking here ab

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

* Why should we have our own HTTP API and not follow PSR-7? possible points: - PHP-FIG propose no implementations; pecl_http does - PHP-FIG focus on frameworks; pecl_http in core is useable without dependencies by every simple script - PSR-7 is a moving target; pecl_http exists for ten years

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

On 29/01/15 11:40, Andrea Faulds wrote: > * Why do we need pecl/http? > * Why should pecl/http be merged into PHP core? > * Why should pecl/http be enabled by default? > * Why should we have our own HTTP API and not follow PSR-7? > * What does it offer over PHP’s existing HTTP capabilities? > * Why

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

Hi Mike, > On 29 Jan 2015, at 11:14, Michael Wallner wrote: > > I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of the > things mentioned previously. > > I you still find anything lacking, please let me know, so I can expand the > RFC accordingly. The RFC is an improvement

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

On 29/01/15 12:32, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Awesome work! > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Michael Wallner > wrote: > > I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of > the things mentioned previously. > > I you still find an

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

Hi Mike, Awesome work! On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Michael Wallner wrote: > I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of the > things mentioned previously. > > I you still find anything lacking, please let me know, so I can expand the > RFC accordingly. > > And of c

[PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http

Hi! I’ve rewritten the RFC for pecl_http and hopefully addressed most of the things mentioned previously. I you still find anything lacking, please let me know, so I can expand the RFC accordingly. And of course, everything else is up for discussion. Thanks, Mike -- PHP Internals - PHP Runt