[En-Nut-Discussion] NutTcpAccept() timeout
harald.kipp at egnite.de
Fri Jul 21 12:55:48 CEST 2006
At 11:19 21.07.2006 +1000, you wrote:
>Henrik Maier wrote:
>>So I opt for Brett's case #1.
>Likewise from me, minimal damage to existing codebase, required
>functionality met, transparent if timeout not set.
That's my view too.
I really hate version incompatibilities, but in long term we
may otherwise suffer from a large number of overriding API
calls, similar to what we already have with NutNetConfig...
and all the derived calls and subcalls.
Last not least, I'm really spending some amount of time on
API documentation. That job won't become easier with a
number of new APIs, option flags and structure fields.
More information about the En-Nut-Discussion