Re: new subcategory "Node" & something about processes

Hm.. Sounds good. One Socket_Base and several abstract classes with different constructors and members. On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 10:15:53 -0500 sterling@bumblebury.com (Sterling Hughes) wrote: > > Why not just have a top level namespace, "Socket", with subclasses like > > Socket_Unix > Socket_tcp > Socket_vector > > whatever.... > > If you are looking at SHM, Pipes, etc. Use the IPC sub-directory... > > -Sterling > > > > Hm.. Yes.. But why don't leave Net_Socket how it is and create some new > > category then. > > > > No problem with this at all, except that I still think all this stuff is > > vaguely networking related, and so belongs under the Net/ namespace in PEAR, > > and the Networking category on the pear website. > > > > > Socket is much more than a tcp/udp network socket. And where to store fifo > > or sysvmsg stuff then. > > > As said in pear's documentation I know that something shouldn't be twice > > available in pear. > > > > Well it shouldn't be available twice if the two are indifferent. If however > > there is sufficient difference, then there's no problem having two > > implementations. > > > > > But in this case the second Socket solution would provide lots of nice > > feautres. > > > Because of portability, the socket extension also works for windows. > > > But I think you're talking about "Should i install php with sockets now > > because of that?" > > > Well.. If someone hardly needs unix sockets in the script he must install > > the extension. > > > Why shouldn't Pear provide a nice interface to use them ? > > > > I never said it shouldn't. > > > > -- > > Richard Heyes > > V-webmail - http://www.v-webmail.co.uk > > > > > > -- > > PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >