unofficial mirror of guile-user@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* SRFI 106 "basic socket interface" in Guile
@ 2021-10-25  2:59 Tim Lee
  2021-10-25  6:11 ` Nala Ginrut
  2021-10-25  6:35 ` Maxime Devos
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Tim Lee @ 2021-10-25  2:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: guile-user

I noticed that Guile does not implement SRFI 106 (basic socket interface)
(https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-106/srfi-106.html). Is there a
fundamental reason for the omission? I'm just wondering whether or not
Guile has all the socket primitives needed to implement SRFI 106.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: SRFI 106 "basic socket interface" in Guile
  2021-10-25  2:59 SRFI 106 "basic socket interface" in Guile Tim Lee
@ 2021-10-25  6:11 ` Nala Ginrut
  2021-10-25  6:35 ` Maxime Devos
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Nala Ginrut @ 2021-10-25  6:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Guile User

To my experience on implementing the server-core of Artanis with pure
Guile. I think srfi 106 could be mostly covered by the current Guile.
However, I'm not sure about some options as constants.

 Best regards.


On Mon, Oct 25, 2021, 13:57 Tim Lee <progscriptclone@gmail.com> wrote:

> I noticed that Guile does not implement SRFI 106 (basic socket interface)
> (https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-106/srfi-106.html). Is there a
> fundamental reason for the omission? I'm just wondering whether or not
> Guile has all the socket primitives needed to implement SRFI 106.
>
>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: SRFI 106 "basic socket interface" in Guile
  2021-10-25  2:59 SRFI 106 "basic socket interface" in Guile Tim Lee
  2021-10-25  6:11 ` Nala Ginrut
@ 2021-10-25  6:35 ` Maxime Devos
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Maxime Devos @ 2021-10-25  6:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tim Lee, guile-user

Tim Lee schreef op ma 25-10-2021 om 02:59 [+0000]:
> I noticed that Guile does not implement SRFI 106 (basic socket
> interface)
> (https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-106/srfi-106.html). Is there a
> fundamental reason for the omission? I'm just wondering whether or
> not
> Guile has all the socket primitives needed to implement SRFI 106.
> 

I don't think Guile has an equivalent of *msg-peek*, *msg-oob*
and *msg-waitall*.  I don't know why SRFI 106 asks for socket-
{input/output}-port to return fresh ports, if non-fresh ports
were allowed, the socket itself could be returned.  Except for
these issues, everything seems to be implementable in pure GUile.

Greetings,
Maxime




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-10-25  6:35 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-10-25  2:59 SRFI 106 "basic socket interface" in Guile Tim Lee
2021-10-25  6:11 ` Nala Ginrut
2021-10-25  6:35 ` Maxime Devos

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).