14 May
2006
14 May
'06
6:11 p.m.
On Sat, 13 May 2006 19:00:06 -0400 (EDT) Mathieu Bouchard matju@artengine.ca wrote:
<snip> > > What would be the name of a unix-socket version? [unix] seems too vague. > [pipe] is already taken. [namedpipe] and [localsocket] could be fine. > However, putting "socket" in the name is contrary to the naming of [tcp] > and [udp]. OTOH, I don't care much for making those names three letters > long, because they aren't used often enough. (it's not like [t] or [f]) >
How about having a socket class, where the subclass is defined by the first argument like this [socket unix], [socket tcp] [socket udp] etc?
I haven't looked at Martin's code yet, so this may be inappropriate, but I thought it might be worth suggesting..
Jamie