[erlang-questions] Erlang HTTP client is not so fault tollerant...
Tue Dec 11 11:44:01 CET 2007
On 11/12/2007, Ingela Anderton Andin <ingela@REDACTED> wrote:
> Now this is comparing apples to pears. Sure they are both HTTP-clients but the
> they have really different approaches. ibrowes is really basic leaving
> very much up to the user. A minimalistic approach, at least last time I checked, which
> I admit was some time ago. The inets client has the concept of sessions and profiles,
> more cookie support, automatically retries pipelines when a previous request fails, supports ipv6,
> streams result to a file or a process with active-once flow control, supports soft code upgrade etc.
Just to clarify things, ibrowse also supports
* Profiles per destination webserver
* Save to file or stream to process
Can't really compare quality as I have never used the new-and-improved
in built HTTP client.
More information about the erlang-questions