From: Olaf van der Spek (olafvdspek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-10 04:27:01
On 3/9/07, Darren Garvey <lists.drrngrvy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 09/03/07, Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > On 3/9/07, Darren Garvey <lists.drrngrvy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > > Well I've been having a go implementing the fastcgi protocol using asio
> > and
> > > even though it's not finished, I believe given some dedicated time I
> > could
> > > have it fully working. SCGI is supposed to be 'simple' - and seems to be
> > -
> > > so that shouldn't be too big a deal to add: either way, that is
> > something
> > > that could follow, I suppose? Then there's the docs of course. Forgoing
> > any
> >
> > Which servers support SCGI but not FCGI?
>
>
> It shouldn't matter because there's no guaranteed way to differentiate a
> SCGI request from an FCGI one (although you can make a good guess, I
> suppose). Your point is noted though: SCGI should be included in any
> CGI/FCGI proposal.
Actually, my point is more like the opposite. If all servers that
support SCGI also support FCGI, there's no point in writing a client
lib that supports SCGI because FCGI is faster (AFAIK) and will always
be supported.