Re: [lwip-users] SOCK_RAW

[Ed Sutter]

I hadn't thought about that, but now that you mention it, maybe
there should be some #ifdefs there.  It sure would have saved me
some time.  Seems like the only place it's really needed is
in lwip_socket().  The associated case statement would just be
wrapped with an ifdef...

#if SOCK_RAW
        case SOCK_RAW:
        ...
#endif
#if SOCK_UDP
        case SOCK_DGRAM:
        ...
#endif
#if SOCK_TCP
        case SOCK_STREAM:
        ...
#endif

The error return would cause a developer to look at the function and
immediately see that the code was dependent on the options being set.
Make sense?


Different question...
One of the primary reasons I started working with LWIP was because
of the ability to use the sockets API or the sequential API depending 
on system needs.  So far I have exclusively used the sockets API.
Does anyone have any idea what percentage of users are using sockets vs. 
sequential?

Ed


Jani Monoses wrote:
> 
> > 2. It seems like the sockets API code that uses SOCK_RAW should be
> >    dependent on the same LWIP_RAW definition, right?
> 
> Yes. Although in sockets there is no dependence on LWIP_TCP or LWIP_UDP
> either. Possibly other parts in src/api need some more ifdefs
> 
> Jani
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users