On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Gilles Detillieux wrote: > when it's not supposed to. However, in the case of head_before_get, > I believe the question was raised, but not actually answered, as to > whether this attribute even needs to be here. [Snip] > head_before_get in this latter case. Doesn't keeping this attribute > just add to code bloat, user confusion, and potential inefficiencies > for no apparent benefit? Maybe I'm missing something here, as I'm > not as versed in HTTP/1.1 as you are. It seems to me that htdig should > always be doing a HEAD before a GET when doing incremental digs through > persistent connections.
I suppose you could make a case that it is useful during the development of the spidering code to always see this header separately.. This marginal debugging benefit could be handled well with #ifdefs. I'm with you on this one.. we should just kill head_before_get. I would vote for killing it instead of hacking the logic. And we should probably be on alert during this process to think about killing any other configs that look unneeded. Neal Richter Knowledgebase Developer RightNow Technologies, Inc. Customer Service for Every Web Site Office: 406-522-1485 ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php _______________________________________________ ht://Dig Developer mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List information (subscribe/unsubscribe, etc.) https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-dev
