[Lazarus] HTTP client/server components committed.

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

On 17/05/2011 15:45, Marcos Douglas wrote:
>
> But it's also reinventing the wheel, no?

That could be considered another down side, especially if the 3rd party
library has a lot of functionality.

Other benefits:
 - A "lite" version could be implemented in FPC - reducing time to
   implement, and easier to maintain. If the develop then wishes to
   have more functionality, they can always opt to use the 3rd party
   library instead.
 - Sometimes re-implementing something is not all bad. After all the
   best code comes from doing something two or three times over -
   learning from your prior mistakes. I've seen this quite often in
   real-world projects.[*]


[*]
In one company I worked this was mandatory. We used to implement a
prototype for clients. If the prototype was accepted, we deleted the
prototype source code (keeping the binary only), then started from
scratch with the source code. This might sound strange, but it worked
amazing well.


> vantages in this project to migrate, eg, the Synapse can do same, no?

>From what I have read, Michael implemented the bare basics of file/data
transfer. If you want any advanced features, or a different protocol
(eg: ftp, nntp components etc), I would imagine Synapse would still be
the better choice.


Regards,
  - Graeme -

-- 
fpGUI Toolkit - a cross-platform GUI toolkit using Free Pascal
http://fpgui.sourceforge.net/