I used the code from http://blog.obdev.at/representing-socket-addresses-in-swift-using-enums/ in my package SwifterSockets (see github link below)
It does not answer your question exactly, but I think it is a rather better approach to sockaddr usage. Regards, Rien Site: http://balancingrock.nl Blog: http://swiftrien.blogspot.com Github: http://github.com/Swiftrien Project: http://swiftfire.nl > On 29 Dec 2016, at 14:27, Etan Kissling via swift-users > <swift-users@swift.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > When calling POSIX accept, the common way is to > sockaddr_storage addr = {0}; > sockaddr_len addrlen = 0; > int clientFd = accept(serverFd, (sockaddr *) &addr, &addrlen); > > In Swift, this translates to > var addr = sockaddr_storage() > var addrlen = sockaddr_len(0) > int clientFd = withUnsafeMutablePointer(to: addr) { > $0.withMemoryRebound(to: sockaddr.self, capacity: 1) { addr in > Foundation.accept(socket, addr, &addrlen) > } > } > > Since sockaddr is smaller than sockaddr_storage, I wonder if this is correct. > > If withMemoryRebound would be the same as the simple C cast, it would be okay. > However, since it also requires passing the capacity, I wonder if there may > be cases > where it actually copies out the memory region, which could lead to memory > corruption. > > ==> How can I guarantee that withMemoryRebound binds the complete > sockaddr_storage, > and prevent cases where only the first MemoryLayout<sockaddr>.size > bytes are bound? > > Thanks > > Etan > _______________________________________________ > swift-users mailing list > swift-users@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users _______________________________________________ swift-users mailing list swift-users@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
