Federico Montesino Pouzols wrote:
The CCXX_IPV6 wrapped classes seem a practical and quick fix. I can't
think of a simpler way of fixing this problem. I agree it looks a bit
ugly, but it seems the best short term solution. We should think of
a tidier solution for the future :)
Then I guess we have this to do for a 1.5.1 release :). Yes, it seems
this approach offers the least harm (well no harm) to existing code.
Maybe IP addresses should be handled in a different way in ccRTP, or
maybe a common base class for both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses could be
added to CommonC++.
I think so too, perhaps in 2.0, as it can break a lot of things.
On Thu, October 5, 2006 2:01 pm, David Sugar wrote:
When I look into the case of OutgoingDataQueue, I was thinking maybe in
that particular case, we can have a CCXX_IPV6 wrapped
OutgoingDataQueueIPV6 which inherits from the existing
OutgoingDataQueue. It could re-implement just those methods that deal
with addresses with new methods that use the IPV6Host objects, cap the
v4 virtual with a dummy method, and offer a new v6 virtual of it's own.
We could then feed OutgoingDataQueueIPV6 to the upper level template.
That might be ugly, but it could work without breaking a lot of
existing code or writing all that much new code. The same could
probably be done for the other two classes.
I would like to see some feedback on this before doing this :).
_______________________________________________
Ccrtp-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ccrtp-devel
begin:vcard
fn:David Sugar
n:Sugar;David
org:Tycho Softworks
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel;work:+1 201 215 2609
url:http://www.tychosoft.com
version:2.1
end:vcard
_______________________________________________
Ccrtp-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ccrtp-devel
