Re: Luasocket FTP problem

["Eric Tetz" <erictetz@...>]

ketmar <ketmar@ic.km.ua> wrote:
> perfectly correct implementation.

The "fix" doesn't make the implementation any less correct, it just
makes it work better in the real world. Nothing lost, something
gained. No-brainer.

If you have two choices, both of which are correct according to the
spec, yet one gives you better real world compatibility --
IRRESPECTIVE OF WHY (you seem to be hung up on the fact that it works
better because of bugs on the server) -- the latter choice is
OBVIOUSLY superior.

> if there's no such standard, than this is an ugly workaround,
> not a 'bad choice'. more workarounds --> more messy code -->
> more standards violations.

How is changing 'pasv' into 'PASV' an "ugly work around", "messy
code", or a "standards violation"? *lol*