Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81375
Return-Path: <cryptocompress@googlemail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 61785 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2015 12:18:35 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 29 Jan 2015 12:18:35 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=cryptocompress@googlemail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=cryptocompress@googlemail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain googlemail.com designates 209.85.212.181 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: cryptocompress@googlemail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.212.181 mail-wi0-f181.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.212.181] ([209.85.212.181:46448] helo=mail-wi0-f181.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id AB/A9-09212-9152AC45 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:18:35 -0500
Received: by mail-wi0-f181.google.com with SMTP id fb4so23730691wid.2
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 04:18:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=vkHpYO9duEeFr/4yQkiPgaHNiECcVGdcTGWadFCSJYQ=;
        b=sXHlYDQxqAJahNc+eq5dLDnnEX2Vt/6NM7PoLhRK/AE6tCNe0i3KSXdiB1bbv83cv7
         quPmT6nrFq+r7+caYQd+UFH7OfDFFH4BWNDMc1Jz79/+Buc+tIGIae7VvaxdYPdydqnT
         VN+VbUC1M6YT4O5+4F6qJdxToUCUH16WU85cmSlQWF5Jhh+4fCsaCpL3xpFLJ5eIDk8J
         zbgl3SsfejnfkQ/UXe1PEe6nBISVCmUv+dZ5L1mTM8hz32zPn7YCj6+Talp0j2y6U+/1
         LP2516BR6v1qRtnI3EeA4NfTsA25BzJCLsHxnqGACzIqFeSgp7Dd7M7y+uzl+nnQoN9t
         kGMQ==
X-Received: by 10.180.83.5 with SMTP id m5mr541509wiy.74.1422533909540;
        Thu, 29 Jan 2015 04:18:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.115] (mnch-5d856122.pool.mediaWays.net. [93.133.97.34])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 18sm10230993wjr.46.2015.01.29.04.18.27
        for <internals@lists.php.net>
        (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Thu, 29 Jan 2015 04:18:28 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <54CA2512.5040807@googlemail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 13:18:26 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <DDA98D4F-2105-415A-B921-01A622091FA9@php.net> <E58D2EFD-4531-4A1F-B71A-D847C4D2EBA6@ajf.me>
In-Reply-To: <E58D2EFD-4531-4A1F-B71A-D847C4D2EBA6@ajf.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http
From: cryptocompress@googlemail.com (Crypto Compress)


> * Why should we have our own HTTP API and not follow PSR-7?

possible points:
- PHP-FIG propose no implementations; pecl_http does
- PHP-FIG focus on frameworks; pecl_http in core is useable without 
dependencies by every simple script
- PSR-7 is a moving target; pecl_http exists for ten years
- PSR-7 can be complementary to pecl_http not the other way around (c 
code can't use php code?)
- native implementations should be faster