2011/9/7 Richard Frith-Macdonald <[email protected]> > > Apples documentation doesn't currently apply ... the GNUstep DO > implementation was written to match the original NeXT DO API, and classes > like NSSocketPort simply didn't exist then, and they don't do quite the same > things. > You would need to do quite a lot of work to make the GNUstep implementation > details match the Apple ones. >
That's ok. There is an NSSocketPort, although I trust it behaves different compared to Apple's implementation. > > That being said, since GNUstep is free/open, you could of course write a > UDP subclass of NSPort and use that for DO and contribute it. > I just took a look at GNUstep docs, and looks like the primary thing I cannot do is that I cannot feed my own file descriptor to NSSocketPort. I'm more interested if there is something at the protocol level that prevents using UDP as transmission protocol. Having a lossy protocol is the goal here, and DO depending on return values from the network would prevent that. > But ... using BSD sockets directly would probably be simpler/easier if all > you want is to send datagrams for a particular application. I'm sure it would, but that's so ordinary. ;) Using ObjC message sends to do actual network message sends would be so much more awesome in a game. For most games, DO over TCP is great. But it would be interesting to see if action games could use the same model. -- Ivan Vučica - [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
