On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 11:49:16PM -0200, Diego Souza wrote:
Hi,
thanks for the feedbacks. They sound very reasonable.
Going back in time, the first version was in fact a pure library.
However, at some point I changed this as I thought it would make it
easier to use, which might have been
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge jer...@goop.org wrote:
On 02/15/2011 08:02 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:
In the next
iteration of WAI/http-enumerator, they will both depend on http-types
most likely. But since http-types did not exist until recently,
http-enumerator
Thanks! I'm going to start working on this. Creating specific
typeclasses is a good idea and I also believe that these changes can
be done without breaking existing code. I'll see how that goes and
keep you guys updated.
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:27 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge jer...@goop.org wrote:
I was thinking in separating the core and http functions in order to
be able to provide implementation for http-enumerator without breaking
existing clients. Also the ones who don't need http interface don't
need to use the full stack.
I was not aware of CPRNG classes, thanks for that. I'll
On 02/16/2011 02:57 AM, Michael Snoyman wrote:
I have yet to write to the mailing lists about it, but likely there
will be a rename/expansion based on a recommendation by Johan.
Basically, we need two datatypes: Ascii and CIAscii. I'm not sure if
that addresses your questions though.
Mostly
On 02/16/2011 06:00 AM, Diego Souza wrote:
I was thinking in separating the core and http functions in order to
be able to provide implementation for http-enumerator without breaking
existing clients. Also the ones who don't need http interface don't
need to use the full stack.
I was not
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge jer...@goop.org wrote:
On 02/16/2011 02:57 AM, Michael Snoyman wrote:
I have yet to write to the mailing lists about it, but likely there
will be a rename/expansion based on a recommendation by Johan.
Basically, we need two datatypes: Ascii
Thanks! I'll merge it tonight :-)
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge jer...@goop.org wrote:
On 02/16/2011 06:00 AM, Diego Souza wrote:
I was thinking in separating the core and http functions in order to
be able to provide implementation for http-enumerator without breaking
Hi,
I'm trying to use http-enumerator with Twitter's streaming API, which
requires OAuth authentication.
I was hoping to use the hoauth package for this, but it seems that
combining with with http-enumerator is pretty awkward.
In principle, it should be straightforward since hoauth defines a
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:42:57AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
And since I'm still trying to get my head around enumerators, I may have
that aspect of things completely wrong. I haven't even tried running
any of this yet, so I don't know if I've made any non-type errors.
Am I even
On 02/15/2011 02:14 PM, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
Clearly, http-enumerator is the best package for doing http/https. however
since it's pretty new, lots of package still uses their own abstraction for
doing things.
While it may be possible to retrofit hoauth to use http-enumerator, using the
Hi,
thanks for the feedbacks. They sound very reasonable.
Going back in time, the first version was in fact a pure library.
However, at some point I changed this as I thought it would make it
easier to use, which might have been a mistake of mine. Back then
http-enumerator wasn't available and
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 2:05 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge jer...@goop.org wrote:
On 02/15/2011 02:14 PM, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
Clearly, http-enumerator is the best package for doing http/https. however
since it's pretty new, lots of package still uses their own abstraction for
doing things.
On 02/15/2011 05:49 PM, Diego Souza wrote:
Hi,
thanks for the feedbacks. They sound very reasonable.
Going back in time, the first version was in fact a pure library.
However, at some point I changed this as I thought it would make it
easier to use, which might have been a mistake of mine.
On 02/15/2011 08:02 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 2:05 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge jer...@goop.org wrote:
On 02/15/2011 02:14 PM, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
Clearly, http-enumerator is the best package for doing http/https. however
since it's pretty new, lots of package still uses
15 matches
Mail list logo
