[En-Nut-Discussion] NutTcpAccept() timeout
Thiago A. Corrêa
thiago.correa at gmail.com
Thu Jul 20 16:06:26 CEST 2006
>From the API point of view, I actually prefer the former, because at the
first sight it's obvious that it has a different behavior. The function name
expresses what it does, and that's what the API designer should strive for.
Just my 2cents...
On 7/20/06, Harald Kipp <harald.kipp at egnite.de> wrote:
> At 20:07 06.07.2006 +1000, you wrote:
> >To be compatible with existing applications, these calls could be either
> >implemented as overloaded "Try" version of the connect and accept call:
> > NutTcpTryAccept(sock, port, waittime);
> > NutTcpTryConnect(sock, ip, port, waittime)
> >or using ioctl and specific socket options (SO_ACCTIMEO and SO_CONNTIMEO)
> >to apply time-outs to these two operations.
> >I actually prefer the latter option as it keeps the API lean and neat.
> I'd prefer the latter too. It may break a few apps, but would
> be easy to fix.
> Looks like I have been the only one rejecting this previously.
> Please go ahead.
> En-Nut-Discussion mailing list
> En-Nut-Discussion at egnite.de
More information about the En-Nut-Discussion