Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Issue: #523 #524

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Issue: #523 #524

wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

Kleinmarb
Copy link

Add support for the socket options named in #523,
fix some typos
and add .idea to .gitignore

@Kleinmarb Kleinmarb changed the title #523 Issue: #523 Aug 9, 2024
.gitignore Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.idea/.gitignore Outdated
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you remove this .idea directory from the commits?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I removed it in later commits, is that enough?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, please rebase the commits.

src/sys/unix.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
src/sys/unix.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
src/sys/unix.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/sys/unix.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/sys/unix.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
/// [`set_rcv_lowat`]: crate::Socket::set_rcv_lowat
// TODO: add Redox support, but I'm not sure if Redox supports SO_RCVLOWAT
#[cfg(all(feature = "all", not(target_os = "redox")))]
pub fn rcv_lowat(&self) -> io::Result<u32> {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we come up with more descriptive names for these functions?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe receive_lowat and send_lowat? Lowat stands for low water mark. maybe something with that?
Or we could add a get_ prefix which would not align with the naming conventions of these socket option getter functions, but would be more descriptive. You tell me, since I don't know how bad it is to break naming conventions in this repo.

@Kleinmarb
Copy link
Author

It seems like the tests failed, I'm currently in my holidays, programming on a windows laptop :/. I can't run the unix tests locally.

@Thomasdezeeuw
Copy link
Collaborator

@Kleinmarb do you have time to work on this?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants