apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r821524 - in /apr/apr/trunk: CHANGES include/apr_network_io.h libapr.dsp network_io/beos/socketcommon.c network_io/os2/socket_util.c network_io/unix/socket_util.c test/sockchild.c test/testsock.c
Date Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:10:02 GMT
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Ruediger Pluem <rpluem@apache.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 10/06/2009 10:52 AM, Joe Orton wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 12:09:58PM -0000, rpluem@apache.org wrote:
> >> Author: rpluem
> >> Date: Sun Oct  4 12:09:57 2009
> >> New Revision: 821524
> >>
> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=821524&view=rev
> >> Log:
> >> * Add apr_socket_is_connected to detect whether the remote side of a
> socket
> >>   is still open. The origin of apr_socket_is_connected is r473278 from
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
> >>   in httpd.
> >
> > The naming is not good here.  A TCP socket is "connected" after the
> > connection is successfully established via connect(), up until it is
> > destroyed.  From the name, I would expect this function to do would be
> > to say whether a non-blocking connect() has completed.
> >
> > This function will reliably tell you that the receive part of the socket
> > has been shut down by the peer, in the case that the socket's read
> > buffer is empty.  Notably the socket may still be "connected" in that
> > state, albeit in half-duplex mode.
> >
> > I'd suggest a name like:
> >
> >  apr_socket_atreadeof
> >  apr_socket_at_read_eof
>
> I am fine with changing the name. I let this thread sit some time
> to give others the opportunity to chime in as I want to avoid changing
> the name more than once. If no proposal comes up I am likely to go
> in the apr_socket_at_read_eof direction.
>
> > or something similar?  The API docs should reflect that the return value
> > is 1-on-success/zero-on-failure (unusual for APR), and that the function
> > does not block.
>
> I can invert the return value as well, but in this case shouldn't this
> be reflected in the name as well?
> So with inverted return value shouldn't it be
>
> apr_socket_at_read_not_eof
>
> or do you think I shouldn't return an int at all and return apr_status_t
> instead
> with APR_SUCCESS if the read side of our end of the socket is eof
> (and leaving the name as apr_socket_at_read_eof in this case)?
>

silly thought from the crowd, in case there are other conditions we'd
potentially want to report:

if (apr_socket_status_get(sock, &status) != APR_SUCCESS || status &
APR_SOCK_AT_EOF) {
  /* stop using */
}

Doesn't "EOF" imply "read"?

Mime
View raw message