Hi, RME 在 2010-1-14，02:51， R. Matthew Emerson 写道： > >> Committed as r520 [1], thanks. > > Note that I'm not familiar with usocket---there may well be a better way. > > For instance, the patch doesn't set the host-or-ip slot of the condition > object to the host or ip address for which the lookup failed. (In fact, it > just sets it to nil for lack of anything better). > > Presumably this won't be an issue since the caller already knows what remote > host it tried to connect to. One other possibility might be to handle > ccl:socket-creation-error in get-host-by-address and get-hosts-by-name---that > way the address or name would be lexically available to include in the > ns-condition object.
Yes you're right, the WITH-MAPPED-CONDITIONS / HANDLE-CONDITION interfaces didn't leave us a chance to pass the raw host/port data instead of a created usocket object, when the conditions throwing on socket creating. Considering this won't be a big issue as you already said, I think it's better to leave it as is, until we have a better condition passing design in the future. Touching GET-HOST-BY-NAME is not a perfect design, I think, as people may use this function separately and expecting the behavior like before. On the other side, I'm living in China, in which any hostname is resolvable: ISP is hijacking DNS query packets so that every unsolvable hostname could be redirected to a default address for holding ISP's ads. Any way, I think I don't have any chance to test CCL's this new facility ... --binghe > > Anyway, thanks. If there are bugs or omissions in CCL that affect usocket > (or enhancements to CCL that would make it work better), please feel free to > make tickets at http://trac.clozure.com/ccl >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ usocket-devel mailing list usocket-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usocket-devel
