Re: [Scheme-reports] Scheme-reports Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

Thomas Bushnell, BSG scripsit:

> Then drop the function. No portable program could do anything with its
> return value except note that string? returns #t. If your intention
> is that in a "normal" system it might return something like "eth0",
> then can you please provide a sample implementation? It's harder than
> you think in Unix.

Oh.  No.  In this context, "interface" means an local IP address
or equivalent hostname, as explained at the top of the wiki page.
I grant the term is a confusing one, but "host" is consistently
used for the remote host (address or name).  What's returned is
implementation-specific, but it will work to create another datagram
channel.

> > > What does "datagram-channel-connected-host" return? (Does it return
> > > whatever was passed at connect time, or does it return the value
> > > of getpeername, or does it return a reverse lookup of the value
> > > of getpeername, or does it return a canonicalized version of what
> > > was passed at connect time?)
> >
> > Implementation-dependent.
> 
> Then drop it, because no portable program could ever use it. (For
> anything, since not even the type is specified.)

As stated, a host is a string, so it returns a string.  The content of
the string is unspecified (might be a dotted-decimal or colonized-hex
or DNS hostname), but it will work (as above) to create a new channel.

-- 
Well, I have news for our current leaders       John Cowan
and the leaders of tomorrow: the Bill of        cowan@x
Rights is not a frivolous luxury, in force      http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
only during times of peace and prosperity.
We don't just push it to the side when the going gets tough.  --Molly Ivins

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports