On 11/26/13 5:05 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Wednesday, 27 November 2013 at 00:19:31 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Care to make it interesting? I may have some funds for this. But we're
looking for no less than a glorious 100% replacement.
Meh, my first choice is still to just bundle curl with phobos, like we
do with zlib. It seems silly to me to want a glorious 100% replacement
of an *open source* library.
Regardless, I probably wouldn't be the ideal choice for changing the
implementation because I barely use the interface: I wrote my own http
modules, including one that uses curl and one that doesn't, before
std.net.curl came around. The phobos thing had no compelling benefit to
me, so I never switched most my code.
Thus, I'm not very familiar with std.net.curl's strengths and weaknesses
and would likely break it somehow while changing the implementation.
...unless doing a new interface is on the table too. Then, we can leave
std.net.curl exactly how it is, so people who use it don't have broken
code, while a new std.net.http, std.net.smtp, std.net.ftp, and so on are
phased in for people who want them. I could get behind that.
A new interface is also on the table, but that brings the additional
burden of defining your own design. std.net.curl has already been approved.
Andrei
