[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Sockets Layer Counter Proposal



(2012/10/09 18:25), Arthur A. Gleckler wrote:
I certainly support your choice of using Schemely names instead of
Unix-specific, all-caps names like SOCK_STREAM;
I will take some names from Aaron's specification so that no longer Unix-specific names. That seemed way better.

of making it possible to
use the same interface to support things like Unix domain sockets and
other implementation-specific types;and not requiring that a separate
socket be allocated for each recipient address for UDP packets.
I'm not sure these are _basic_ requirements. I don't use much socket however I've never written something like UNIX domain sockets or re-using socket. I believe these should be lower layer and for users who need more controls.

--
_/_/
Takashi Kato
E-mail: ktakashi@xxxxxxxxx