Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: gopher: April 2002:
[gopher] Re: Pygopherd nearing gopherd replacement
Home

[gopher] Re: Pygopherd nearing gopherd replacement

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: gopher@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gopher] Re: Pygopherd nearing gopherd replacement
From: Ralph Furmaniak <sugaku@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 16:42:39 EST
Reply-to: gopher@xxxxxxxxxxxx

> Are you saying that the Gopher server process would post-process the 
> output from foo and re-render it in some fashion?

Looks like that's cleared up.
I still think that the output should be post-processed.  This is especially an 
issue when the server can do http output.  Either way, if there is no 
pos-processing then the executable will have to know the hostname, port, the 
documentroot, whether it should be formatted for gopher0,gopher+,http.  For 
this you would probably need to set environment variables, and then make a 
library that is accessed by the executables (unless you want each programmer to 
remake this on their own).  PLus, this would limit the possible languages to 
those with libraries.

Another possibility is for the script to signal back to the server what it is 
printing, but I think that the extra character is enough.

How is it better to have the character at the end?



[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]