[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr()
From: |
Freddie Chopin |
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr() |
Date: |
Tue, 05 Apr 2016 15:55:03 +0200 |
On wto, 2016-04-05 at 13:27 +0200, Dirk Ziegelmeier wrote:
> sorry, special treatment of NULL to avoid too many functions
Would it make sense to implement such special treatment directly
in netif_set_addr()? This way the whole thing would be consistent -
netifapi_netif_set_addr() would still be a wrapper for
netif_set_addr(), nothing special about it. Personally I would prefer
this option.
If such special treatment would be implemented only
in netifapi_netif_set_addr(), then this function would no longer be
equivalent to netif_set_addr()...
If one really wants to set any of the addresses to 0, then there's no
problem - instead of NULL, just use IPADDR_ANY.
Regards,
FCh
- [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr(), Freddie Chopin, 2016/04/01
- Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr(), Dirk Ziegelmeier, 2016/04/05
- Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr(), Freddie Chopin, 2016/04/05
- Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr(), Dirk Ziegelmeier, 2016/04/05
- Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr(),
Freddie Chopin <=
- Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr(), Dirk Ziegelmeier, 2016/04/05
- Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr(), Freddie Chopin, 2016/04/05
- Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr(), Dirk Ziegelmeier, 2016/04/05
- Re: [lwip-devel] Behaviour of netifapi_netif_set_addr(), Dirk Ziegelmeier, 2016/04/14