[ruby-core:17400] Re: XMLRPC socket patch

>> I have made a patch to the XMLRPC implementation used in Ruby to allow 
>> more flexibility in it's usage. I have developed this to let the 
>> developer choose which transport system to use. The http 
>> implementation is normally used, but for some needs i had to use local 
>> domain sockets.
> 
> Do you have any idea how common this usage is?  I really don't know, 
> having never encountered it personally.

In fact i fear that it is not commonly used, but standard library should
be general purpose isn't it?

> If it's not super common, I'm wondering if it would be better as a gem 
> that adds the needed functionality.  Those who need it could install the 
> gem and modify their require statement.  Just a thought.

I rewrote it as a class, and in fact it is a more ruby style approach,
without socket factories which made it a lot like java's approach.
Exposing new_socket (mandatory) and read_response and write_request 
(optional) methods, changing do_rpc accordingly, is a simpler way.

>> To obtain this i have added support for socket factories.
>> There is a  new initialization method to set the socket factory (and 
>> new3 has been adapted) and the initialize method has 10 arguments now. 
>> The main difference is in the do_rpc method that will issue e new 
>> socket from the factory and write the request to it and will read the 
>> answer. The limitation is that since there is no protocol the socket 
>> must be closed to end the communication.
> 
> One of your comments seems to imply that you're not too sure of the 
> implementation.  Are we confident enough to include this with Ruby?

In fact, there were old comments i forgot to remove... it works, but
the limitation is for real,anyway writing it as a gem made it even 
easier to change the answer managment.

> Would it be possible to add some tests in test/xmlrpc/ for this new 
> functionality?

They can be easily done, but i don't think it is the case right now. 
I'll post it on rubyforge if it can't be inserted in the library.
I have added as attachment the class i wrote instead of patching the 
already existing one. If it is good i'll provide any required test.