Oleg Broytmann schrieb:
IMO you better don't because urllib2 provides not only an abstraction,
but a lot of services (authenticated proxies, cached FTP files)...
If you are using http ranges, cached FTP files won't do any good.
As for authenticated proxies: I think they ought to be
Oleg Broytmann schrieb:
HTTP is one of the most widely known and used protocol. Would you better
have big httplib and small abstract urllib? so abstract it doesn't allow a
user to change protocol-specific handling?
Personally, I think very elaborate support for HTTP in httplib, and very
few
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 10:00:48PM +0100, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
Personally, I think very elaborate support for HTTP in httplib, and very
few generalizations and abstractions in urllib* would be the right
way to do it, IMO. For example, there might be the notion of an
http session object where
Hi guys,
I've just been putting together a podcasting doodad and have included resuming
support in it. Is this something that's already in the pipeline or should I
abstract it out to urllib and submit a patch?
Dan
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Dan I've just been putting together a podcasting doodad and have
Dan included resuming support in it. Is this something that's already
Dan in the pipeline or should I abstract it out to urllib and submit a
Dan patch?
Check urllib2 before putting any effort into extending urllib.
Daniel Watkins schrieb:
I've just been putting together a podcasting doodad and have included
resuming
support in it. Is this something that's already in the pipeline or should I
abstract it out to urllib and submit a patch?
Not sure where you got the impression that 206 is resume; in my
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I've just been putting together a podcasting doodad and have included
resuming
support in it. Is this something that's already in the pipeline or should I
abstract it out to urllib and submit a patch?
Not sure where you got the impression that 206 is resume; in my
Fredrik Lundh schrieb:
given that urllib2 already supports partial requests, I'm not sure I see
the point of reimplementing this on top of httplib. an example:
import urllib2
request = urllib2.Request(http://www.pythonware.com/daily/index.htm;)
request.add_header(range,
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 08:30:00AM +0100, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
If you add protocol-specifics to urllib, the abstraction that urllib
provides goes away, and you are better off (IMO) to use the underlying
protocol library in the first place.
IMO you better don't because urllib2 provides not
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
given that urllib2 already supports partial requests, I'm not sure I see
the point of reimplementing this on top of httplib. an example:
import urllib2
request = urllib2.Request(http://www.pythonware.com/daily/index.htm;)
request.add_header(range,
10 matches
Mail list logo
