[DGD] Re: 1.1.37

[Jason Cone]

-----Original Message-----
From: Felix A. Croes <felix at xs1.simplex.nl>
To: dgd at imaginary.com <dgd at imaginary.com>
Date: Monday, March 16, 1998 4:55 AM
Subject: [DGD] Re: 1.1.37


>[...]
>
>As you can see, it does differ a great deal.  Moreover, I consider the
>functionality of the net package unsafe and will <never> make it a
>part of DGD, no matter how much sense this would make to others.
>
>Abandon all Hope for inclusion in DGD, Ye who use the Net Package.


*laugh*  Fair enough.  However, I really dislike that word... "unsafe".  It
sends a somewhat unwelcome shiver up me spine. ;)  Do you care to expound on
this issue?  I consider the use of the Net Package an incredibly important
one and, honestly, one that I can't be totally productive without.  Well,
not totally true, but I won't be able to implement all the things that I'd
like to.  Anyway, does "unsafe" mean that the integrity of OS that DGD is
running on is unsafe?  Or is it more inclined to describe the unstability of
DGD's code while using the Net Package?  I personally would like to know all
the issues at hand before subscribing 100% to this piece of functionality.

Thanks for the explanation on send_datagram(), btw - makes total sense.

--
  Jason H. Cone
  Dept. Computer Science
  Texas A&M University
  jcone at cs.tamu.edu





List config page:  http://list.imaginary.com/mailman/listinfo/dgd