Internals: add Windows error code equivalences #37
Conversation
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
Note that this is not entirely semantically equivalent. The errors mapped here are not valid in all contexts but rather are limited to the context of calls to the WinSock subsystem. |
Windows does not have the same set of error codes as a POSIX system. However, the WinSock subsystem provides a set of error codes which are meant to provide a means for handling similar error scenarios with sockets. This additionally adds an additional error code which allows us to add back a previously ignored error code.
|
@swift-ci please test |
milseman
left a comment
milseman
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. Out of curiosity, how was ESOCKTNOSUPPORT compiling before this change?
|
I don't believe that it was. I believe that it was added after the initial port, and because there is no CI, we never noticed that we broke the build. There were a few instances of that. However, once a CMake based build is in place, I can easily setup a nightly build job to build Swift System on Windows, and should even be able to kick off one-offs with a patch if desired. |
|
Ah, that was because we were hand-declaring them with the int literals instead of the module constants: 4ffcc62#diff-0ee5719a7e727f19909c8ae438eb8ad3e0cdaa454fc4e1e51cea56f34feec8c1R214 |
|
@swift-ci please test linux platform |
2 participants
Windows does not have the same set of error codes as a POSIX system.
However, the WinSock subsystem provides a set of error codes which are
meant to provide a means for handling similar error scenarios with
sockets. This additionally adds an additional error code which allows
us to add back a previously ignored error code.