Chris Burke wrote: > Miller, Raul D wrote: > > In the attached example, you take the header > > > > Host: ws:81
> This is mapped into: > HOST: ws > PORT: 81 > > In the examples, only the first line and the HOST line > are split up this way. I understand that. But when I look at the potential implementations, this is (or could be) one of the more complex aspects of the requirements. Except for this case, the output record is a set of pre-specified headers, and a set of headers which are passed through verbatim. However, the above case introduces a need manipulate that set of headers so that one does not appear in the result. It may also imply a need to discard duplicate headers in other contexts (maybe only for Port, maybe for all headers). While these operations are not very complex when compared to what one normally does in J, they could still account for a significant slice of execution time in this context. That wouldn't bother me, except that this requirement also seems to be at odds with the RFC-822 headers format requirement: RFC-822 headers routinely include duplicated header names. For example, the message I'm replying to arrived in my mailbox with 15 Received: headers and 2 X-Virus-Scanned: headers. A related issue is: what is supposed to happen when there's a domain name in the uri part of the first line and a host header? Another related issue is: what is supposed to happen when one of the explicitly generated headers also appears in the supplied headers? If there are header elimination requirements here, I think they should be explicitly specified. Or, if there's no actual requirement, I think the lack of requirement should be explicitly noted. The examples do not resolve all these issues. Thanks, -- Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
