[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [libmicrohttpd] New project: microhttpd.h or microhttpd2.h?
|
From: |
Christian Grothoff |
|
Subject: |
Re: [libmicrohttpd] New project: microhttpd.h or microhttpd2.h? |
|
Date: |
Sun, 25 Mar 2018 11:33:49 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 |
On 03/25/2018 04:05 AM, silvioprog wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I'm going to create a new project from scratch that uses MHD as main
> HTTP library, so I'm free to choose a new API. However, I have some
> questions that may help me to choose between microhttpd.h and microhttpd2.h:
>
> * can I use the new API in production? (I'm following MHD changes, but
> I'm not sure about the new API development status)
No. It compiles, but there are chunks of code missing to even get the
minimum things to work.
> * will the previous API still receiving new features and updates?
> (specially for websockets)
If necessary, sure. I expect to maintain both APIs for years in parallel.
> * is there a tutorial or reference to study the new API? (this two
> documents of the previous API helped me a lot: 1
Not yet.
> <https://www.gnu.org/software/libmicrohttpd/tutorial.html> / 2
> <https://www.gnu.org/software/libmicrohttpd/manual/libmicrohttpd.html>)
> * is there examples or tests (even drafts) showing how to use the new API?
Not yet.
> I'm OK to study (and contribute) the new API and I'm inclined to choose
> it because its simpler/friendly functions, MHD_Action etc., but if you
> don't recommend to use it for while I'm happy using the current stable
> API anyway. ;-)
Always happy for contributions, and translating existing (old API)
testcases, examples and documentation to 'new API' would definitively be
a good starting point, but be aware that even if done correctly, the
code could not yet possibly work.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature