[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: WSAPI replacement draft
- From: "Stuart P. Bentley" <stuart@...>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:00:14 -0800
?>Good idea as for the 0.x version number, but I explicitly had the
version number as a *number* (as opposed to a string) for a reason -
namely, it's much easier to do comparisons with numbers than with strings
(you can explicitly do a "greater than" or "less than," and you can use
math.floor to get the minor version), and also I don't think that there
would really be "patch level" changes to the spec - just minor changes and
The thing is, (unless you're [Donald Knuth],) version numbers are
sequences of unsigned integers, not decimal numbers (see
If granular version comparison is such a big deal that it needs to be
supported at the interface level (usually, in the edge cases where you need
to check version, string.sub and string.find with tonumber will be more than
enough), you can keep the version as a table, and read the major version
number as environ.version.major (or environ.version).
Things my fork doesn't keep:
Replaced with a straight "body" string that contains the POST body,
since the only reason to make this a stream is to accommodate CGI.
Nope. For example: assume someone uploads a 4.2 MB photo to your photo
hosting site. You don't want the whole thing in memory at once (especially
if your site is particularly high-traffic) - much easier just to stream it
to a file in nice, manageable 4K blocks.
It was 28 hours in the morning when I wrote that and I was under some wild
sleep-deprived assumption that multipart bodies generated multiple requests
that were assembled at the application level.
I've put the input stream back in my latest revision (as the inputread()
I've also made some embellishments to the spec for errorwrite().
Regards, Matthew "LeafStorm" Frazier