Re: lwp-request -H 'HTTP-Header: value', plus LWP::Simple
Gisle Aas (gisle@aas.no)
21 Mar 1999 23:19:19 +0100
Ed <ed@chronos.net> writes:
> Below is a patch to lwp-request, the POD snippet says:
> + -H <header> send this HTTP header (you can specify several)
> This change means that now lwp-request uses Getopt::Long, so it
> uses $options{d} and not $opt_d.
Looks good. Applied.
> I also propose an addition to LWP::Simple::get, and a new function,
> L::S::post. They will both take a second parameter (optional for
> get), which will be a hash-ref. This hash-ref is like so:
> {
> cgi_var_name => $value,
> cgi_var_name2 => [ $value1, $value2 ],
> }
> I mention get(), because with the second parameter specified, users
> wouldn't need to write their own CGI-encoding functions. The second
> parameter hash would be URL-encoded up and sent, in the obvious way.
I don't think I like this suggestion. A post() function similar to
LWP::Simple::get() which forget most stuff in the response (like
response code) is not the right thing. I rather prefer that people
use the full OO interface for this. The reason I never added a post()
function to LWP::Simple is that I never found any interface that I was
happy with.
> Finally, after discussing this with Gisle, I'd like to hide the
> nastiness of cookies. This, as he suggested, would be an optional
> third hash-ref argument to either get() or post(), in a similar
> spirit to the above.
Remind me.
Regards,
Gisle