On Friday, February 27, 2004, at 12:26 , Andrew Dougherty wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
inet_pton is preferrable, as it supports IPv6.
That is, inet_pton should trump inet_aton if both are available.
Probably, but that would require testing to see if inet_pton is
available
Andrew Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
[ inet_aton vs inet_pton ]
>> We need a config test here.
> Something like this ought to do the trick for now. Longer term, we need
> to build up some infrastructure for testing for functions on our own. W
Andrew Dougherty wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
>
> > On Mac OS X, the preferred technique would be to weak link with
> > inet_pton and test for its availability at run-time. (inet_pton is
> > not available on 10.1, but is available on 10.3.) This would be
> > another cas
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
> inet_pton is preferrable, as it supports IPv6.
> That is, inet_pton should trump inet_aton if both are available.
Probably, but that would require testing to see if inet_pton is available.
That information is not available from perl5's Configure, an
inet_pton is preferrable, as it supports IPv6. I think the code should
read either:
#if PARROT_HAS_INET_PTON
... use inet_pton ...
#else
... use inet_aton ...
#endif
or
#if PARROT_HAS_INET_PTON
... use inet_pton ...
#elsif PARROT_HAS_INET_ATON
... use inet_ato
