Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [http] Formal Review
From: Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira (vini.ipsmaker_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-08-13 11:43:56

2015-08-12 19:27 GMT-03:00 Lee Clagett <forum_at_[hidden]>:

> Anyway - I was thinking along the same lines at various points. Having a
> function that pre-generates HTTP messages is very useful IMO, and should
> likely be included. Designing a good parsing concept would be a bit more
> work I think, but probably worth it too. I'm not sure how the author
> intends to swap out parsers in the current design. Having a fixed parser
> seems acceptable, but the author almost seemed to suggest that it could be
> selectable somehow.

A parser doesn't make sense for all communication channels.

Currently there is one communication channel: basic_socket<T>

basic_socket<T> is meant for embedded servers (will be extender for lean
HTTP client connections in the future) and is tied to the HTTP wire format,
so it uses an HTTP parser. I don't expose the parser because I use a C
parser that is limited to the C (lack of) expressiveness. When I replace
this parser by a better one, I'll change the situation. I don't plan to
allow selectable parsers for basic_socket, but it'd be useful to select
parser options (like strict parser, liberal parsers, max header size and so

Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at