[Bug-gnulib] Re: xinet

[Simon Josefsson]

Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:

> I dunno, that one looks fairly specialized.  It allocates
> constant-sized and small objects, which is often easier and more
> efficient to allocate in the stack frame of the caller.  Also,
> inet_ntoa is obsolescent, as it can't handle IPv6 addresses.
>
> If we're going to all that work, wouldn't it be better to build a
> wrapper around inet_ntop instead?  It is more future-proof, and it has
> the varying-size buffer problem that needs a wrapper more.

Right.  I ended up removing my code that needed inet_ntoa, but if I
use inet_ntop somewhere I'll write a xinet_ntop/xinet_pton wrapper.

Thanks.