Re: [RFC] [VOTE] pecl_http

From: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 19:18:40 +0000
Subject: Re: [RFC] [VOTE] pecl_http
References: 1 2 3 4 5  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message
Hi Michael,

> On 28 Jan 2015, at 19:13, Michael Wallner <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> - Client
> 
> The http stream wrapper is a hack and the existing libcurl binding is
> subpar. They could be improved separately, but that is not subject of
> this RFC.
> 
> Currently only libcurl is implemented as a provider for the client
> functionality. Provides most of the functionality of current libcurl.
> Representation of the request and response how a client sees them.
> Support for parallel requests and optional libev{,ent} support.

If the client is merely a wrapper around cURL, what benefit does it offer over ext/curl except a
better API?

Personally, I’ve never liked that PHP requires cURL for doing HTTP requests. It’s a language
made for the web, it should have built-in HTTP, and it should share code between its server-side
HTTP and client-side HTTP stuff. I don’t think that the HTTP stream wrappers are a “hack” -
they’re what PHP should have had all along. I think we should focus on improving them (so
there’s no need to use cURL) rather than adding yet another HTTP client.

Thanks.
--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/






Thread (53 messages)

« previous php.internals (#81326) next »