Re: looks like Intel vs. PowerPC difference
Re: looks like Intel vs. PowerPC difference
- Subject: Re: looks like Intel vs. PowerPC difference
- From: Andrei Tchijov <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 14:22:54 -0400
Very true. It just that I got bitten by it (I did not assigned
initial values to in/out stream). Nowhere in the documentation it
mentions that you have to nil initial values in order to be able to
check success/failure. It looks little bit odd to me. Why this
method does not return some sort of status is quite beyond me.
To be fair, documentation does not promise that in/out stream
variables will be nil-ed on failure.
On Aug 3, 2006, at 2:04 PM, Sherm Pendley wrote:
On Aug 3, 2006, at 1:37 PM, Andrei Tchijov wrote:
It looks like
+[ NSStream (void)getStreamsToHost:(NSHost *)host port:(int)port
inputStream:(NSInputStream **)inputStream outputStream:
(NSOutputStream **)outputStream ]
works slightly different on Intel, compare to PowerPC. On
PowerPC, when this method fails, it will set inputStream/
outputStream to nil. It looks like on Intel, in case of failure,
it leaves inputStream/outputStream untouched.
That sort of internal detail shouldn't make a difference in how you
use this method.
NSInputStream *inStream = nil;
NSOutputStream *outStream = nil;
[NSStream getStreamsToHost:someHost port:somePort
inputStream:&inStream outputStream:&outStream];
What effective difference can it possibly make whether
+getStreams... method explicitly set either inStream or outStream
to nil, or simply left the existing nil value alone? Either way the
result will be the same - nil on failure.
sherm--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden