On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 20:36 +0100, Yang Tse wrote:
> Yes, of course, there's also the option of adding them unconditionally
> to the c-ares API, probably ares_inet_ntop and ares_inet_pton deserve
> that 'honor', I'm not so sure the other ones do.
That sounds like it would lead to c-ares becoming a sort of general
grab-bag of "handy internet functions". I kind of feel that, if there
are systems which lack these functions (which are relatively
well-standardised nowadays: they're part of the IPv6 basic API), they
ought to be provided in a dedicated compatibility library and not as
part of c-ares.
p.
Received on 2009-11-03