Re: [Chicken-users] tcp-connect open ports problem

[Matt Jones]

felix winkelmann wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Matt Jones <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Kon Lovett wrote:
> > > Versions before 3.0 are unsupported AFAIK. Packaged sources are
> > > available at the Chicken website:
> > > http://call-with-current-continuation.org as are instructions for
> > > accessing the source repository.
> >
> > Thanks for the tip.  I have upgraded to version 3.4.  The problem persists,
> > though.  I looked at the source and the relevant part is the same.  The
> > function 'fail appears to close the port -- (##net#close s) -- but somehow
> > these ports end up open and accumulate.
>
> Is it possible that the condition-case handling somehow skips the
> closing of the port? (A lame question, I know - but I don't
> know what to do besides trying the code myself, for which I currently haven't
> got the time)
>
>
> cheers,
> felix


Hm ... my quesiton is, What is the intended behavior of tcp-connect when 
it signals an exception after failing to connect?  Is it supposed to 
leave a port open?  That is what it appears to do.

I can't close the port when I handle the exception because I'm not in 
possession of it.  (The exception is signalled during the call to 
tcp-connect, so it never returns a valid port.)  That's why it seems 
more likely that it shouldn't be open when the exception is signalled.

(BTW, this part of my message above

>> The function 'fail appears to close the port -- (##net#close s) --
>> but somehow these ports end up open and accumulate.

refers to the code in Chicken's tcp.scm, in the definition of 
tcp-connect, not my code.  My code isn't trying to close the port.  My 
point there was that tcp-connect appears to close the port before 
signalling an exception, yet the port remains open.  I realize that was 
probably unclear.)

Best
Matt