From: Eric Hodel Date: 2005-07-08T02:16:17+09:00 Subject: Socket documentation [Was: Re: socket.c - s_recvfrom] On 07 Jul 2005, at 05:39, Zach Dennis wrote: > Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote: > >> Hi, >> In message "Re: socket.c - s_recvfrom" >> on Thu, 7 Jul 2005 12:24:50 +0900, Zach Dennis >> writes: >> |If I am reading s_recvfrom correctly in can throw an error which >> kills |the application... >> | >> |Would it make sense for it to return a -1 if the underlying call >> to |recvfrom failed, like the unix system call recvfrom does? >> No, every system call in Ruby throw an exception on failure >> consistently. If I change the recvfrom behavior, it causes a bad >> inconsistency. Can you accustom yourself to the Ruby Style? >> > > I figured you'd have a good reason. I am trying to wrap my head > around some of the underlying c implementation, and i happened to > to have been working with sockets quite a bit in these past few days. > > This may be a little off, but socket documentation is not so good > right now. I would even try to write some of the socket > documentation myself if I could submit it to someone with > understanding to check it for correctness, and perhaps add to it > for completeness if i miss anything. Adding socket/socket.c to ext/.document doesn't add much to Socket's documentation, it seems that only setsockopt and getsockopt are documented. It would be great if you could add RDoc to socket! Maybe Dave Thomas can donate his documentation from the Pickaxe book... -- Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://segment7.net FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04