On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Jeff Trawick <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Mladen Turk <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 07/18/2012 05:49 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote: >>> >>> >>> Is it possible that this results in flaky behavior depending on >>> third-party software installed? >>> >> >> Well, MSDN clearly states: >> <quote> >> Note: The function pointer for the AcceptEx function must be obtained >> at run time by making a call to the WSAIoctl function ... >> </quote> >> >> If I understand English grammar correctly *must* is something >> you can't interpret at will. >> >> However whether this is a reason for a flaky behaviour or not >> is a question. But in any case the statement "must be obtained" >> is a pretty clear. > > Yeah, I agree completely on "must", and I'll try to fix that Real Soon > Now. On the rest, I was just mumbling that I saw a potential > connection between an API that (unexpectedly) you are supposed to > obtain dynamically and past reports of failures in the use of that API > in some configurations supposedly involving third-party software that > developers can't readily reproduce. (unclear to me how much of this > is urban legend)
Other MS doc indicates that the reason the address should be retrieved dynamically is performance: The available static function in mswsock.lib will try to retrieve AcceptEx on each call. There was a bit of snowballing on what seemed like a simple change... The static GetAcceptExSockaddrs no longer fills in addresses if the dynamic AcceptEx is used, and some MinGW levels are missing the necessary definitions. >> >> >> Regards >> -- >> ^TM >> >> > > > > -- > Born in Roswell... married an alien... > http://emptyhammock.com/ -- Born in Roswell... married an alien... http://emptyhammock.com/
