Jump to content

Fast Ping


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Rolf Kalbermatter said:

It will still work on 32-bit LabVIEW. The 32-bit Windows Winsock is documented to use 32-bit SOCKET values,

Then they can't use the upper bits in a future version if they want it to work on 32 and 64 then :P If it was Linux, I'd be worried but M$ tend to keep backwards compatibility.

1 hour ago, Rolf Kalbermatter said:

That may go fine as long as the upper 32-bits aren't used but it may also go wrong. If you change it to be a LabVIEW 64-bit integer everywhere in LabVIEW itself and configure those parameters everywhere as pointer sized integer, it will always go right,

I think we are talking at cross purposes, I am talking only of the FD arrays for the Select Single VI in this API but I think you are talking about the socket type generally. I just fixed the error in select to get it to work. You'd have to speak with the original developer, All my socket API's use a U64 on the compane and usz in the CFLN - which was why I fixed the select the way I did. I'm not planning on using this API so if there are more issues, then the owner should address them (otherwise there'll be hundreds of variants kicking around; each with their own buglets).

Link to comment
40 minutes ago, ShaunR said:

Then they can't use the upper bits in a future version if they want it to work on 32 and 64 then :P If it was Linux, I'd be worried but M$ tend to keep backwards compatibility.

I think we are talking at cross purposes, I am talking only of the FD arrays for the Select Single VI in this API but I think you are talking about the socket type generally. I just fixed the error in select to get it to work. You'd have to speak with the original developer, All my socket API's use a U64 on the compane and usz in the CFLN - which was why I fixed the select the way I did. I'm not planning on using this API so if there are more issues, then the owner should address them (otherwise there'll be hundreds of variants kicking around; each with their own buglets).

If you are not using this code anywhere then you are fine here. I thought you may use it in some production code and I would find it in that case not a very responsible choice to swipe it under the rug with the reasoning that it just works anhow.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Rolf Kalbermatter said:

If you are not using this code anywhere then you are fine here. I thought you may use it in some production code and I would find it in that case not a very responsible choice to swipe it under the rug with the reasoning that it just works anhow.

Nope. I can't use anything that I didn't write myself unless it has an explicit licence that I can adhere to . I have another solution that also supports IPv6.

Edited by ShaunR
Link to comment
  • 7 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.