HTTPAPI vs ISockets

["Jones, Simon" <Simon.Jones@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

   This isnt really a technical question as such, more a
   comment/statement of support for HTTPAPI.  Having used this facility
   for a while with no issues, no problems, and knowing that it has saved
   me in the past probably weeks of effort in doing I was amused to see
   the following post in one of the forums

   "Heck, look at iSockets (www.isockets.net) it is a SOCKETS wrapper
   *SRVPGM that I
   wrote a couple years ago. Why did I write it? Because the one that
   "everybody"
   suggested I use, written by a noted Magazine Author, was so ridge that
   I
   couldn't install it into anything other than the library the author
   initially
   used. Which meant I had to add yet another library to my library list
   to,
   compile it, to run it and to allow the end-users to use it.  The
   attitude of
   "you've got the source, and it was free so change it yourself" is sort
   of
   strange and only dampens the desire for others to use it. And this one
   was
   written by a relatively good developer."

   At least he thinks Scott is a 'relatively' good developer, although
   quite what you need to do to be an 'actually' good developer is beyond
   me at the moment!




   This email was sent by a company owned by Pearson plc, registered
   office at 80 Strand, London WC2R 0RL.
   Registered in England and Wales with company number 53723

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the FTPAPI mailing list.  To unsubscribe, please go to:
http://www.scottklement.com/mailman/listinfo/ftpapi
-----------------------------------------------------------------------