Re: The Split? (was Re: LuaSocket http ftp smpt...)

[PA <petite.abeille@...>]

On Feb 03, 2005, at 20:22, Diego Nehab wrote:

> > Talking of splitting... from my perspective, LuaSocket is either a
> > misnomer or it tries to do too many things at the same time...
>
> The name LuaNet was taken, NetLib was too... :)

DiegoLib? ;)

> I do want to distribute these things as separate libraries.  It would
> simply be a maintenance, distribution, and installation nightmare.  How
> would the reuse be increased? Things are already modular.  Perhaps the
> same effect can be achieved by better advertisement?

Hmmm... not sure if this is really a question of advertising the 
library functionality. For me, beside neat functional separation, the 
main distinction is between pure Lua code and external, "native", C 
library dependencies.

> I would say that the core deals with the transport layer. Whatever case
> it might be. I always had plans to support local domain sockets (which
> I already distribute as a sample), pipes, named pipes, so on and so
> forth. These things have to be implemented in C.

Yes. And LuaSocket should stick to just that :)

> I would leave DNS in the core, since there is not much you can do with
> TCP/IP and UDP without DNS.

Fair enough.

> > (3) A generic MIME handling facility.
> >
> > (4) LTN12 as a little world in itself. Filters, sources, sinks, pumps
> > are useful generic concept which could be used in many different
> > contexts.
>
> These two are already completely independent from the rest of 
> LuaSocket.

Good. How do I use them outside of LuaSocket's realm?

> However, other LuaSocket modules depend on them, and were the original
> motivation for their development.

Cheers

--
PA, Onnay Equitursay
http://alt.textdrive.com/