From: Ralph Furmaniak <sugaku@sympatico.ca>
To: gopher@complete.org
Subject: [gopher] Re: Pygopherd nearing gopherd replacement
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 16:42:39 EST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: 
 <20020405214239.CHDN4902.tomts24-srv.bellnexxia.net@[209.226.175.18]>
Sender: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Errors-to: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: gopher@complete.org


> 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?