Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81377 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 65469 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2015 12:40:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Jan 2015 12:40:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ajf@ajf.me; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ajf@ajf.me; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.200 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 192.64.116.200 imap1-2.ox.privateemail.com Received: from [192.64.116.200] ([192.64.116.200:48924] helo=imap1-2.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id BE/5A-09212-54A2AC45 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:40:39 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91FF4B0008F; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:40:34 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at imap1.ox.privateemail.com Received: from mail.privateemail.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (imap1.ox.privateemail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 5piaShTNkDUD; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:40:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from oa-res-26-240.wireless.abdn.ac.uk (oa-res-26-240.wireless.abdn.ac.uk [137.50.26.240]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A562B00087; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:40:33 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\)) In-Reply-To: <54CA2512.5040807@googlemail.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 12:40:30 +0000 Cc: PHP Developers Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <5FAD6FD2-FAEB-4494-B4FB-71A47AC7760A@ajf.me> References: <54CA2512.5040807@googlemail.com> To: Crypto Compress X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) > On 29 Jan 2015, at 12:18, Crypto Compress = wrote: >=20 >=20 >> * Why should we have our own HTTP API and not follow PSR-7? >=20 > possible points: > - PHP-FIG propose no implementations; pecl_http does > - native implementations should be faster I don=E2=80=99t see how that=E2=80=99s relevant: I=E2=80=99m talking = here about the API, not the implementation. Why should PHP=E2=80=99s = HTTP API not be PSR-7? > - PHP-FIG focus on frameworks; pecl_http in core is useable without = dependencies by every simple script Also irrelevant, there=E2=80=99s no reason it couldn=E2=80=99t use = PSR-7=E2=80=99s API. > - PSR-7 is a moving target; pecl_http exists for ten years Fair point. > - PSR-7 can be complementary to pecl_http not the other way around (c = code can't use php code?) Not necessarily true. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/