From: <ja...@un...> - 2003-11-16 23:50:45
|
Vincent Arkesteijn <vi...@ar...> writes: > Instead of making sb-bsd-sockets depend on sb-posix, another option > could be to make sb-bsd-sockets part of sb-posix? > > I don't really oversee all the consequences, but everything in > sb-bsd-sockets seems to fit the scope of sb-posix ("operating system > calls on a typical Unixlike platform"). I like this idea, but I was kind of under the impression that sb-bsd-sockets isn't really a one-to-one map to the sockets system, but is a Lispy interface to socket handling. So sb-posix should have the raw socket functions and structures that are documented in Unix manpages, and sb-bsd-sockets should be built on top of that support in sb-posix. That's kind of how I thought things were headed anyway. BTW, I care about this because I'm playing around with a telnetd implementation in SBCL. I'm trying to figure out where to add support for getaddrinfo(), gettosbyname(), and a bunch of other crufty socket stuff that the generic BSD telnetd implementation uses. 'james -- James A. Crippen <james at unlambda.com> Lambda Unlimited 61.2204N, -149.8964W Recursion 'R' Us Anchorage, Alaska, USA, Earth Y = \f.(\x.f(xx))(\x.f(xx)) |