develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from August 2001

Re: Modules that get passed a bareword?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Nick Ing-Simmons
Date:
August 20, 2001 01:06
Subject:
Re: Modules that get passed a bareword?
Message ID:
20010820080237.1542.2@bactrian.ni-s.u-net.com
Jeff Okamoto <okamoto@xfiles.corp.hp.com> writes:
>> > I'm slowly working on some IPv6 stuff, and was trying to figure out if
>> > I can move connect/bind/accept (at least) out of Perl's core and into
>> > an XSUB module.
>> 
>> It is unclear to me why you need to change connect/bind/accept at all.
>> These functions were designed to be transport independent and does not
>> assume anything about IPv4.
>
>Unfortunately, they do.  Connect, bind, and accept all have arguments that
>must be different depending on the type of connection (sockaddr_un for
>AF_UNIX, sockaddr_in for AF_INET, and sockaddr_in6 for AF_INET6).

And we can already handle AF_UNIX and AF_INET with one connect,
which proves Gisle's point.

IMHO we leave AF_INET as IPv4 and add a new AF_INET6 (or whatever).

>
>> I thought all that was needed was a new Socket.pm module that formats the
>> address structs differently.  There is already a Socket6.pm module on CPAN.
>> 
>> Can you explain?  Are there some extra RFC I should read that explains
>> this extra API you try to set up?
>
>I'll post a document that explains how I envision adding IPv6 functionality
>to Perl.
>
>Jeff
-- 
Nick Ing-Simmons
http://www.ni-s.u-net.com/


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About