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

is_inet6_addr from unix.ml should be exposed in unix.mli #6105

Closed
vicuna opened this issue Jul 30, 2013 · 3 comments
Closed

is_inet6_addr from unix.ml should be exposed in unix.mli #6105

vicuna opened this issue Jul 30, 2013 · 3 comments

Comments

@vicuna
Copy link

@vicuna vicuna commented Jul 30, 2013

Original bug ID: 6105
Reporter: qrntz
Status: confirmed (set by @damiendoligez on 2013-08-28T09:16:26Z)
Resolution: open
Priority: normal
Severity: feature
Platform: i686
OS: Gentoo Linux
OS Version: Rolling release
Version: 4.00.1
Category: otherlibs
Tags: patch, junior_job

Bug description

I don't see the reasoning behind is_inet6_addr from unix.ml not being exposed in the interface; there is no other way to identify an inet_addr's address family once one has been created and while the function is fairly trivial in itself, the same code wouldn't work outside of Unix because the type abbreviation of inet_addr = string is hidden (and I would really rather not resort to type magic for something as simple as this).

There is domain_of_sockaddr that can return either PF_INET or PF_INET6 (and uses is_inet6_addr to determine that) but it's unintuitive what with being a level of abstraction higher.

File attachments

@vicuna
Copy link
Author

@vicuna vicuna commented Feb 18, 2014

Comment author: dsheets

Patch attached.

@github-actions
Copy link

@github-actions github-actions bot commented May 15, 2020

This issue has been open one year with no activity. Consequently, it is being marked with the "stale" label. What this means is that the issue will be automatically closed in 30 days unless more comments are added or the "stale" label is removed. Comments that provide new information on the issue are especially welcome: is it still reproducible? did it appear in other contexts? how critical is it? etc.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label May 15, 2020
@nojb
Copy link
Contributor

@nojb nojb commented May 18, 2020

Duplicate of #4535

@nojb nojb marked this as a duplicate of #4535 May 18, 2020
xavierleroy pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 18, 2020
Closes: #4535
Closes: #6105
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants