Re: New patch for server sockets and datagram (UDP) support.

[Alex Schroeder]

address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:

> Yes, that is the other route we can take - and then also split the
> current TYPE argument into TYPE and FAMILY.  I have absolutely no
> objections to doing that -- actually, that it what I originally wanted
> to do, but then I was told that open-network-stream has too
> many arguments already...

Haha, that was a cheap trick, then.  :)  Anyway, if you provide a list
of special purpose functions as discussed at the end, then this is a
non-issue anyway.  Thanks.

>>         The initial socket for a DCC connection is created by the side
>>         that initiates (Offers) the connection. This socket should be
>>         a TCP socket bound to INADDR_ANY, listening for connections.
>
> Ok, I'll add that.  The selected port number will be available in
> (cadr (process-contact ddc))  (i.e. the SERVICE element).

Thanks for considering this.

> Alternatively, using something like
>   (featurep 'server-sockets)
>   (featurep 'datagram-sockets)
> would be a more generic approach.

That would be nice, or combined with the functions you mention next,
this seems good.

> We could rename the C-level function to, say, open-network-connection
> and write lisp-level wrappers (in simple.el) around it like
> open-network-stream, open-network-stream-nowait, open-network-stream-server,
> open-local-stream-nowait, open-local-stream, open-local-stream-server,
> open-datagram-server, open-datagram-client,
> etc. etc.  
>
> Then you don't have 10 different C functions all doing variations of
> the same thing, but still the user will have all the `specific-purpose'
> functions handy.

That sounds ok to me because I only care about the Lisp level.
Other people shall judge maintenace issues or code issues on the C
level.

Thanks, Kim.

Alex.
-- 
http://www.emacswiki.org/