On Thu, 7 May 2020, Noel Duffy via fpc-pascal wrote:
On 6/05/20 11:21 pm, Christo Crause via fpc-pascal wrote:
> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 12:19 PM Noel Duffy via fpc-pascal
> <fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
> <mailto:fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org>>
> wrote:
>
> So I guess the question is, is it worth the effort to make
> StrToHostAddr6 RFC4291 compliant? Is that something the FPC team
would
> want, or do they just not use the sockets unit?
>
>
> There have been 2 changes applied to sockets.inc in the last two
> months so it is not neglected. I am convinced a patch to ensure
> compliance will be considered for inclusion, especially if you
> provide test cases demonstrating shortcomings in the current
> implementation.
Great. My worry was that the sockets unit might fall into the same
category as the libc one, available but deprecated and not recommended
for use. Plus, when rewriting something that's been unchanged for years,
there's a risk of breaking programs that depend on the bug.
I think the processing of wrong IP addresses and missing IPv4-ending
addresses support is not really something one depends on :)
So fixing this is quite OK.
Michael.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
