[Lazarus] HTTP client/server components committed.

[michael.vancanneyt at wisa.be]

On Tue, 17 May 2011, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

> 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.

Exactly.

Michael.