-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 5, 2008, at 7:23 PM, Gisle Aas wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Michael Greb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As I said above I would solve the problem by not changing
'header_field_names' at all. Do you feel the scan interface isn't
good enough for your use case?
This makes a lot of sense and scan will suit us just fine.
Writing code is easy, it's deciding how that code should behave
that is the
hard part.
True; and in this case we need to define what happens when fields are
modified with 'push', 'set' or 'init' and 'remove' as that's the API
that modify stuff. Let me suggest the following definition of the
behaviour:
- 'push' always append the field at the end of all headers. multiple
occurrences of a field name do not have to be consecutive.
- 'init' either does nothing or it works like 'push'.
- 'remove' will always remove all concurrences of a field.
- 'set' will work like 'push' if no other occurrence of the field
exists.
- 'set' will update the first occurrence if the field exists (and
remove all other occurrences). if multiple field values is provided
with 'set' they are basically all injected at the location of the
first existing value.
You want to try to implement this?
Yes. Have a good chance of losing net connectivity at home this
weekend so this makes for a perfect no Internets required weekend
project ;)
Should wire order imply wire case as well?
- --
Michael Greb
Linode.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFIwcQ90Qbp4bPZvesRAhgBAJ4tt5Gf4T6Pv+cjOA29nFRdkALrsQCg1er8
njeuK0Lt4ZFAJZaIt13q8dY=
=0L3l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
