On 08/13/2018 12:24 PM, Daniel Stenberg wrote: > ... > Sure, I'm not totally against a callback. But we'd still have to convert > the representation to something that we think we can stick to for the > foreseeable future even if the internals would change...
I do not really care what the structure looks like. I simply predict, that the entire caboose will be converted twice in most cases. With a callback you'd make sure that the user takes care of it when the data becomes available in that format - and only then. The addrinfo structure is well documented (spares you the hassle of writing it up yourself;-). If you name the constant/callback after this structure, you can have a new one if the internal structure changes. Then the old addrinfo export would do the copying and be marked as depreciated (you'd then delete the created structures after the callback returns). I simply look at it from a performance angle. Who needs all addresses? This is the exception. It's likely that programs dealing with lots of entries will use this. They will probably use their own format as they will store other information, and they might not need all the data/addresses from your structures. What you suggest surely sounds 'cleaner'. Nonetheless, you'll get the 'copy and convert the whole list twice for every lookup' almost guarantied. That is, your conversion will be discarded immediately afterwards, just to become something new entirely. I guess it depends on personal preference to determine, which of those solutions do hurt more. :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe: https://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library Etiquette: https://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
