On 2/8/2010 05:55, Jacek Caban wrote:
On 2/8/10 3:36 AM, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
Even if that's true, it's not a reason to choose wrong architecture.
Let's say we have a WinHttpRequest object that works, it provides
similar interface as IXMLHTTP.
Why should I use urlmon for that? WinHttpRequest should stay in
winhttp, and won't use urlmon.
We don't have, it's impossible. Pluggable protocol is one of the
reasons and you can't handle them unless you use urlmon.
What's impossible? Yes, I can't handle pluggable protocol without
urlmon, but why do I need it? Maybe I'm missing
something but I don't see why IXMLHTTP needs more than just http.
Btw, what was a reason for using it?
Everything IE-related should use it for binding. It's because of
plugable protocols, shared wininet session and more. urlmon is not
just a wrapper around wininet.
Why IXMLHTTPRequest is IE related? Or you mean that anything that
uses internet should go through urlmon?
It is designed to be used by JScript scripts on web pages (although
it's not the only use of it).
Ah, so you mean using urlmon enables session sharing within browser
context? (I didn't know that)
If so, i should use it of course, instead of direct connection.
Jacek
