[ Note for Wget list readers: this discusses the `--range' option
submitted to the patch list. ]
Herold Heiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, possibly I missed something, does the download start at byte 0
> (like most programmers ecc. would expect) or at byte 1 (like most users
> would exp
>From: Hrvoje Niksic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>[ Note for Wget list readers: this discusses the `--range' option
> submitted to the patch list. ]
>
>Herold Heiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Also, possibly I missed something, does the download start at byte 0
>But you've still rais
Herold Heiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Personally I'd be happy either way, but you'll never be able to make
> happy everybody. Choose what you prefer
I'd love to choose what I prefer, but I'd like to avoid my wild
preferences ruining it for everyone else. :-) Thanks for the
support, though
Herold Heiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, of the top of my head I can't remember many occasions where
> 0-n means closed-open
There are. (And note that it's n-m in the general case, not just
0-n.) Off the top of my head, the Java string subscripts, Lisp
array-related functions, Pytho
On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 05:07:31PM +0100, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
> Or, to pick another example, say you want to download the second
> kilobyte of a file:
>
> --range=1025..2048
> --range=1024..2047
I haven't been following that closely, but how are you going to
tell what the user really wants to
Andre Pang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 05:07:31PM +0100, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
>
>> Or, to pick another example, say you want to download the second
>> kilobyte of a file:
>>
>> --range=1025..2048
>> --range=1024..2047
>
> I haven't been following that closely, but how
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
> >> --range=1025..2048
> >> --range=1024..2047
>
> Only one of those statements will be a valid way of downloading the
> second kilobyte of a file. The question is, which one.
>
> The first one assumes the first byte in the file is "1", the second one
>
Daniel Stenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Then again, both versions could be supported if they just use
> different syntaxes.
Please note that there is a third version which Andre elided. We're
deciding for one or more of:
--range=1025..2048
--range=1024..2047
--range=1024..2048 # m
On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 08:19:08PM +0100, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
> >> --range=1025..2048
> >> --range=1024..2047
> >
> > I haven't been following that closely, but how are you going to
> > tell what the user really wants to do if he gives either of those
> > two statements?
>
> Only one of those
On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 08:33:15PM +0100, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
> Compatibility with rfc2616 is a good point, though. Maybe it's best
> to simply stick to 1024-2047 then.
Compatibility with curl is even more important :). In light of
that, I vote for 1024-2047. No point having two file retriev
Andre Pang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> --range=1025..2048
>> >> --range=1024..2047
>> >
>> > I haven't been following that closely, but how are you going to
>> > tell what the user really wants to do if he gives either of those
>> > two statements?
>>
>> Only one of those statements will
hi!
Here is my IMO (in case someone is really interested in:))
all ranges 0-based,
support few syntax-es:
--range=0..1024-- closed-closed
--range=0-1024 -- closed-open
--range=1024+2048 -- take 3..4 K's :) i.e. get 2k starting on pos 1024
(well last one could be like --r
Vladi Belperchinov-Shabanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here is my IMO (in case someone is really interested in:))
>
> all ranges 0-based,
> support few syntax-es:
>
> --range=0..1024-- closed-closed
> --range=0-1024 -- closed-open
> --range=1024+2048 -- take 3..4 K's :)
>From: Hrvoje Niksic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>Vladi Belperchinov-Shabanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Here is my IMO (in case someone is really interested in:))
...
>So what would be a nice alternative syntax for closed-open? 0:1024?
>Hyphen is easier to type, though. Damn, sometim
Herold Heiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Don't forget you need a symbol for the start->size syntax,too ... +
> would be perfect,
Yes. That's +, as implemented in the original patch. Noone is
disupting that one.
> --range 4096+1k
> or --range 4095+1k (shudder)
Did you mean 4097 here?
>From: Hrvoje Niksic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>Herold Heiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Don't forget you need a symbol for the start->size syntax,too ... +
>> would be perfect,
>
>Yes. That's +, as implemented in the original patch. Noone is
>disupting that one.
>
>> --range 4096+1k
>>
16 matches
Mail list logo
