W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2012

Implementing SPDY, is a day a meaningful criteria?

From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:43:09 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwhkvtPOVV=hi2TcYQ9F46Pf459m4Pj309VkHg6NOOYqyg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
How easy is it to implement SPDY, does the 'implement in a day'
criteria make any sense?

I have written a LOT of HTTP clients and more than a few servers. I
know that it is possible to hack 'something' together in a day and
that implementing a full HTTP/1.1 will take considerably longer. So
(1) what level of implementation are we talking about and (2) what
support libraries are we including?

Implementing a text based protocol like HTTP is easy in C because
stdlib gives you 70% of the code ready made. Implementing HTTP in Perl
or the like is even easier as it provides the parsing ready made.

Take away those support libraries and implementation takes longer, a
lot longer. Give people a similar library for SPDY and maybe the
difficulty of implementation becomes equal. It might become easier.


What I really care about is not how long it takes to code HTTP/2.0.
There are going to be so many libraries floating about that it does
not matter much. What I care about is not how long it takes to
implement but if I can implement on restricted chips like embedded
control systems. So code footprint is more important to me than
time-to-implement. And I think it is a more objectively fair test.



-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/
Received on Monday, 16 July 2012 13:43:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 16 July 2012 13:43:43 GMT