¡Hola!
> > > > I feel the point of that argument is to indicate the size of the
> > > > buffer. We have a chance to catch coding errors; I feel the
> > > > getsockname/getpeername approach is wrong (truncate results if too
> > > > short, don't care if too long). Unless someone can come up with a
> > > > compelling reason, why change?
> > > About truncating, i think like you, but for longer than needed it's
> > > ok to don't care and set namelen, because how is else the user know
> > > how big it is beforehand? (ie, different PF == different lens)
> > If you don't know what PF the socket is, how do you interpret the
> > result?
> getnameinfo... Normal user level code should not know what protocol it
> runs over. You should program AF independent code and let it run today
> on IPv4, tomorrow on IPv6 and in a remote time IPv7, CNLP+ or DecNet X.
BTW, that's reasonable behaviour for get[sock/peer]name, but not for
connect, sendto, etc... where it should check that namelen is the correct
(linux doesn't do that, fbsd does)
Saludos,
HoraPe
---
Horacio J. Peña
horape@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
horape@xxxxxxxxxx
bofh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
horape@xxxxxxxxxxx
|