On Monday, 2012-10-08, Charley Bay wrote: > QUESTION: If you logically need a "network-socket" (LAN or WAN, but > sometimes accidentally on the same-computer), is there a *performance* > issue (or any reasonable design preference) where QLocalSocket would > be "preferable" to a QTcpSocket? (...in the case where you detected > you were on the "same-computer" or a "Windows-network" so you could > use QLocalSocket, and you used QTcpSocket for other networks?)
Not related to performance, but often the main reason to use techniques such as QLocalSocket is better access control. Any process (running as any user) on the machine can attempt a connect to a TCP socket on the loopbar device, while e.g. Unix domain sockets can be created such that only processes of the same user can attempt connections. Cheers, Kevin -- ** Qt Developer Conference: http://qtconference.kdab.com/ ** Kevin Krammer | [email protected] | Software Engineer Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company Tel. Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322) KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-independent software solutions
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
