Hi,
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:46:28PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:09:34PM +0200, Heiko Hund wrote:
> > if (status == EINPROGRESS
> > #ifdef WIN32
> > || status == WSAEWOULDBLOCK
> > #endif
> > )
>
> Please let's not do that.
Uh. Correcting myself. In *t
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 03:57:52PM +0200, Heiko Hund wrote:
> WSAGetLastError() is just a wrapper for GetLastError(). So, there's
> no need to differentiate between socket related and other errors.
ACK.
Earlier versions of Windows handled winsock stuff differently, but
Heiko checked WinXP fo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17/07/12 17:46, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:09:34PM +0200, Heiko Hund wrote:
>> if (status == EINPROGRESS #ifdef WIN32 || status ==
>> WSAEWOULDBLOCK #endif )
>
> Please let's not do that.
>
>> or slightly less distur
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:09:34PM +0200, Heiko Hund wrote:
> if (status == EINPROGRESS
> #ifdef WIN32
> || status == WSAEWOULDBLOCK
> #endif
> )
Please let's not do that.
> or slightly less disturbing
>
> #ifndef WSAEWOULDBLOCK
> #define WSAEWOULDBLOCK 10035L
> #endif
So
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Heiko Hund wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 July 2012 18:11:25 Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>> #define EWOULDBLOCK WSAWOULDBLOCK
>
> EWOULDBLOCK is already defined in errno.h (also in Windows) and shouldn't be
> redefined in my opinion.
So if this is in one place, better a simple #i
On Tuesday 17 July 2012 18:11:25 Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> #define EWOULDBLOCK WSAWOULDBLOCK
EWOULDBLOCK is already defined in errno.h (also in Windows) and shouldn't be
redefined in my opinion.
Heiko
--
Heiko Hund | Sr. Software Engineer | Tel +49-721-25516-237 | Fax -200
SOPHOS NSG | Amalienbadst
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Heiko Hund wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 July 2012 17:25:25 Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>> Just I don't like the CONNECT_IN_PROGRESS.
>> I think it is better to rebase first and then submit the
>> CONNECT_IN_PROGRESS afterwards, I think it would be simpler to just
>> compare to t
On Tuesday 17 July 2012 17:25:25 Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> Just I don't like the CONNECT_IN_PROGRESS.
> I think it is better to rebase first and then submit the
> CONNECT_IN_PROGRESS afterwards, I think it would be simpler to just
> compare to the two statuses.
That would result in either something li
This is a great cleanup.
Just I don't like the CONNECT_IN_PROGRESS.
I think it is better to rebase first and then submit the
CONNECT_IN_PROGRESS afterwards, I think it would be simpler to just
compare to the two statuses.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Heiko Hund wrote:
> WSAGetLastError() is j
