Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:23351 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 14303 invoked by uid 1010); 15 May 2006 01:08:18 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 14288 invoked from network); 15 May 2006 01:08:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 May 2006 01:08:18 -0000 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: bfoz@bfoz.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 204.127.200.81 sccrmhc11.comcast.net NetCache Data OnTap 5.x Received: from ([204.127.200.81:50350] helo=sccrmhc11.comcast.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 08/EE-19568-284D7644 for ; Sun, 14 May 2006 21:08:18 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.5] (c-24-6-134-233.hsd1.ca.comcast.net[24.6.134.233]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2006051501081401100k8qece>; Mon, 15 May 2006 01:08:14 +0000 Message-ID: <4467D47D.1070404@bfoz.net> Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 18:08:13 -0700 User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060507) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wez Furlong CC: internals@lists.php.net References: <44651CAC.4080007@bfoz.net> <4e89b4260605141529h8136efao904fc1bfb23393ea@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4e89b4260605141529h8136efao904fc1bfb23393ea@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [PATCH] Preliminary OpenSSL Changes (PEM) From: bfoz@bfoz.net (Brandon Fosdick) Wez Furlong wrote: > Probably the biggest problem is that it requires C++. > We mentioned to you that C++ was something we avoided in PHP because > it tends to create more problems than it's worth, particularly so in > something that is part of the core distribution. I must have missed that. Although I do remember asking about it and not getting a response. Don't see anything in the archives either. > Can you write it in C instead? I could, but I've finished the functionality I need so now it's hard to justify the time to do a complete rewrite. deadlines, deadlines... I don't see a crypto package in PECL and none of what I've done is strictly SSL related, so would it be acceptable if I fork and submit a module to PECL? Assuming I find the time.