Re: cvs socket extension

On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 05:48:33AM -0700, Chris Vandomelen wrote : > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 05:16:05AM +0200, Markus Fischer wrote: > > > Great :-) > > > > > > So we're seeing this getting implemented soon ? > > > > > > Volunteers, anyone ? :-)) > > > > Is this select stuff so brand new that it's okay to change the API? > > If it is, we should do it quickly before too many people get to > > play with it. > > > > I think I agree now with just using the max, we can always optimize > > more later if we feel it's necessary, I think the most important > > thing now is to get rid of that argument if possible (: > > The new version (renamed, cleaned up) is fairly new, so it should be fine > to do that. While we're at it, wouldn't it be more intuitiv to modify the socket_fd_*() calls to accept the fd_set resource as first parameter and the fd to add or remove as second parameter ? For socket_fd_set() I'ld also vote to let the second parameter be a single socket or an array of sockets (when you're dealing with many connection you're likely holding them in an array than in separate vars); same for socket_fd_clear(). Maybe, but I haven't thought more about it, it would make sense for _isset() [after writing this sentence I think not :) ]. - Markus