[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Please update SRFI-106
Takashi Kato scripsit:
> The macros came after the constants and I wanted to hear opinions
> but unfortunately I haven't heard anything until now. However I
> think it's nice to have both for people who are familiar with C
> socket programming and who aren't.
I think that C programmers shouldn't have much trouble either way:
(address-family inet) and *af-inet* both look pretty close to AF_INET.
The macros have the advantage that it's possible to check at compile
time that the value being passed in is valid, which is not possible with
> > 2) There is no meaningful support for UDP. I think a socket API
> > shouldn't ignore UDP.
> I think POSIX SOCK_DGRAM is for UDP socket (correct me if I'm wrong)
> and the SRFI is supporting it.
You can use bound UDP sockets with this API, but not unbound ones:
for those you need access to sendto() and recvfrom(). See
John Cowan http://ccil.org/~cowan cowan@xxxxxxxx
Lope de Vega: "It wonders me I can speak at all. Some caitiff rogue
did rudely yerk me on the knob, wherefrom my wits yet wander."
An Englishman: "Ay, belike a filchman to the nab'll leave you
crank for a spell." --Harry Turtledove, Ruled Britannia