[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2"
From: |
Kieran Mansley |
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2" |
Date: |
Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:02:21 +0000 |
On Thu, 2009-01-15 at 14:52 +0000, Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> bill wrote:
> > Maybe Jifl can clarify the statement he made because it does sound
> > shocking.
>
> I think I've done lots of clarification! It all comes down to this: given a
> free choice, a custom API is more efficient than the sockets API. That's
> true no matter what the stack. That was my point, and was not saying
> anything bad about lwIP's socket API, which as many people can attest,
> works great for what they need.
For the record, I agree with pretty much everything Jifl has said on
this: his original comment didn't seem in the slightest controversial to
me, and his clarifications explain the situation very well.
Kieran
- Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2", (continued)
- Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2", Jonathan Larmour, 2009/01/14
- Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2", Simon Goldschmidt, 2009/01/15
- Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2", Micael (abc), 2009/01/15
- Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2", Jonathan Larmour, 2009/01/15
- Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2", Micael (abc), 2009/01/15
- RE: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2", bill, 2009/01/15
- Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2", Jonathan Larmour, 2009/01/15
- Re: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2",
Kieran Mansley <=
- RE: [lwip-devel] brain storming about "socket2", Micael Beronius, 2009/01/16