On 6/10/05, Zoran Vasiljevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > I'm in the process of cleaning up the code in order to > re-enable Windows compilation. > I've found several things we'd need to unify somehow: > > We have (until recently) had only TCP protocol support > hence the calls like: > > Ns_SockBind > Ns_SockListen > etc. > > As of now, there are multiple other connection options > supported (raw sockets, udp sockets, unix domain sockets). > There are couple of places in the code where I see: > > > Ns_SockBindUdp > > Ns_SockListenEx > Ns_SockListenUdp > Ns_SockListenRaw > Ns_SockListenUnix > > I'd like to bring in some logic there. Therefore the proposal: > > All TCP related calls should stay as-is. > > We'd add additional calls to better identify what's being done: > > Ns_SockListenTcp (new, should be called by Ns_SocketListen) > Ns_SockListenUdp (exists) > Ns_SockListenRaw (exists) > Ns_SockListenUnix (exists)
Ns_SockListenTcp() should probably replace Ns_SockListenEx() with it's backlog parameter? The passed backlog should be checked, and if it's < 1, use the default from the config file. If this is the new recommended way to listen on sockets, I'd update all callers of the old Ns_SockListen(Ex) functions. People will cut 'n paste old code and continue the confusion. > Then: > > Ns_SockBindTcp (new, should be called by Ns_SocketBind) > Ns_SockBindUdp (exists) > Ns_SockBindRaw (new) > Ns_SockBindUnix (new) > > In binder.c there are some calls which are only used withing the > file hence we'd need to adjust the call interface to illustrate > this: > > Ns_SockRaw - > SockRaw > > Also, the Ns_SockListenUnix is a combination of create + bind > but unlike other pendants, does not honour the preboundUnix sockets. > We should split this. Make the Ns_SockListenUnix actually > honour prebound sockets (which it does not do now) and use > internally the Ns_SockBindUnix to bind so it'd be on-pair with > the TCP. Hmm, Ns_SockListenUnix() doesn't actually call listen(). Is this right? Also, is a backlog parameter appropraite here, as in Ns_SockListenEx()? > All in all, this will not change the functionality but will > *definitely* improve understanding and code maintenance. > There are other places in sock.c which seem pretty odd like > > Ns_SockBind calls Ns_BindSock > > what is the reason of having those two (backward-compat?) You can decalare Ns_BindSock() NS_GNUC_DEPRECATED and no one else need be confused :-) > I will like to cleanup this now. Are there any voices against > or any other ideas? > > Cheers > Zoran
