signoff robots

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 3:48 PM
Subject: [Robots] LWP (was RE: Re: better language for writing a Spider ?)


>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> > Behalf Of Sean M. Burke
>
> ...
>
> > At 10:36 2002-03-14 -0800, Nick Arnett wrote:
> > >[with Python] I'm not seeing long, mysterious time-outs as I
> > occasionally
> > >did with LWP.
> >
> > I have never run into this problem, but I have a dim memory that
> > you may be
> > alluding to what is a known bug not with LWP, but with old versions
(long
> > since fixed in modern Perls and/or CPAN) of the socket libraries in
IO::*.
>
> I'm very diligent about updating, so I doubt if I was seeing an old bug.
> What I would see would be a series of time-outs, usually no more than 10
in
> a row (I limited re-tries to 10, with increasing delays between them in
case
> it was a server busy issue).  But I should make it clear that the bug
> producing the error message out of expat was completely separate.
>
> > >Following an LWP request through the debugger is a long and convoluted
> > >journey...
> >
> > Are you referring to perl -d, or LWP::Debug?
>
> Sorry for not specifying.  I was using the ActiveState graphical debugger
on
> Windows, although sometimes the code was actually running on Linux.  Same
> behavior on both, though.  I did give LWP::Debug a shot, but still could
see
> where the error code was getting introduced.  Wish I could recall better
> specifics, but it's been a few weeks.  As I recall, the server was
returning
> an error, suggesting that there was something malformed about the request
I
> sent it, and that error was being mistranslated in the expat DLL... and I
> recall having trouble even figuring out where expat got involved in the
> mess.
>
> > Maybe I should write an addendum to "lwpcook.pod" on figuring out what's
> > going wrong, when something does go wrong.  The current lwpcook really
> > needs an overhaul, and once my book /Perl & LWP/ is done (hopefully
it'll
> > be in press within a few weeks), I hope to send up some big doc
> > patches to
> > LWP, at the very least revamping lwpcook and then going into each
> > class and
> > noting in the docs whether a typical user needs to bother knowing about
> > it.  (E.g., you need to know about HTTP::Response; you do /not/ need to
> > know about LWP::Protocol.)
>
> That would really be good.  Examples, examples, examples.  I learn by
doing,
> not by reading, and I think there are a fair number of people like me out
> there.
>
> > In short, if people want to see improvements to LWP, email me and
> > say what
> > you want done, and I'll either try my hand at implementing it, or
> > I'll pass
> > it on to someone more capable.
>
> A re-try mechanism would be terrific.  Mine is fairly straightforward.
The
> parameters are a max number of tries, a delay factor that optionally rises
> with each try, and a logging method that details as much as possible about
> each failure.  The latter is where some work on the internals would be
> helpful, to disambiguate error messages as much as possible.  Perhaps a
> simple way to kick in LWP::Debug with appropriate parameters and log the
> results if repeated failures occur?  I always want to see exactly what the
> outgoing request was and the server's actual response, so I know whether
the
> request is munged or the server is being difficult... not that that's
always
> clear.
>
> Nick
>
>
> --
> This message was sent by the Internet robots and spiders discussion list
([EMAIL PROTECTED]).  For list server commands, send "help" in the body of
a message to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]".
>


--
This message was sent by the Internet robots and spiders discussion list 
([EMAIL PROTECTED]).  For list server commands, send "help" in the body of a message 
to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]".

Reply via email to