RE: Top three problems with libwww

Hi,

I think that the major problems are

        - Absence of "pull" stream (like inet's of Java's). The library would be
        much more convenient to use if it would be provided.  
        
        - Necessity to deal with an event loop. I do not quite understand why I
        can write my own PUT and POST in the same app w/o any problems but 
        w3c needs to go into an event loop for PUT and POST (except that it
        might be dictated by the library's design). 

        - The documentation and often the answers to the questions are cryptic
        for the novice with w3c. I think that separate (from .h file comments)
        and much bigger documentation is needed. It would also save Henrik's
        time which he is now spending answering many of the questions :-)


Other problems I do not know what to attribute too - w3c or my insufficient
knowledge of it. Better documentation would help here too.

Thanks,
Olga.

On 21-Dec-98 Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:
> 
> Now when several of you are getting into libwww it would be nice if we
> can capture the places that you find are the most difficult to
> understand/use. I have a hard time figuring this out myself - your help
> would be much better.
> 
> For example, are the profiles ok? Where and how can the documentation be
> improved - or is it better with more sample apps? The eventloop seems to
> cause problems - how can it be explained better?
> 
> Now, there are 798 people who have checked out the code - and if ust a
> few of you are willing to help improve the tough spots then we can quite
> realistically improve it in a fast an efficient manner.
> 
> Henrik

----------------------------------
E-Mail: olga <olga@eai.com>
Date: 21-Dec-98
Time: 13:53:56

This message was sent by XFMail
----------------------------------

Received on Monday, 21 December 1998 15:31:51 UTC