[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 will take some names from Aaron's specification so that no longer
Unix-specific names. That seemed way better.
I certainly support your choice of using Schemely names instead of
Unix-specific, all-caps names like SOCK_STREAM;
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.
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.