Nick Kew wrote: >>You didn't consider using the W3C's libwww? > >I probably will do that in due course. But in the short term, it's a >bigger up-front operation to replace an entire chunk of James Clark's >original code than to patch it ad-hoc. I'll bet. AFAICT, most of James' code is a big mess of spaghetti. :-(Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2001 05:57:37 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:58:20 UTC