Proposal: ByteString based datagram communication (Ticket #1238
bos at serpentine.com
Thu Apr 5 13:54:47 EDT 2007
Robert Marlow wrote:
> My knee-jerk opinion is that the current use of HostName and PortID
> already assume IPv4 protocols such as TCP and UDP more than they could.
They have TCP baked in, but not IPv4. I posted a patch yesterday that
generalises the functions in Network to work with IPv6 as well as v4,
and it required no API changes.
> Consequently, I think making the
> Network module more flexible for extension would involve getting rid of
> the current addressing scheme and implementing some new Address type
> which includes not just the address, but the protocol used.
I don't think there's much point in this. The Network module is not
especially well put together, but it's at least stable. It would be
more profitable to work on the network-alt package or something else
instead of trying to remould the existing API, while breaking it in the
More information about the Libraries