Re: LuaSocket and IPv6

[Matthew Wild <mwild1@...>]

On 24 February 2010 19:42, Sam Roberts <vieuxtech@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 24 February 2010 18:52, A.S. Bradbury <asb@asbradbury.org> wrote:
>>> On 24 February 2010 12:58, Matthew Wild <mwild1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Does anyone have thoughts on this?
>>>>
>>>> Further reading:
>>>>  http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=562163
>>>>  http://prosody.im/bugs/68
>>>
>>> I just thought I'd add that Steven Barth's Apache-licensed nixio has
>>> IPv6 support.
>>>
>>> http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2009-07/msg00143.html
>>>
>>
>> Good to know. Unfortunately LuaSocket is still the more widely used
>> socket library (I know there are others too), and I don't particularly
>> feel like rewriting the socket framework in my server (especially not
>> now I just got it working with libevent).
>
> You rewrote luasocket's socket.select() to use libevent?
>
> Or do you just set luasocket's objects non-blocking, retrieve their
> fds, and use a libevent-based call to do your waiting?
>

We're using LuaEvent[1], or more accurately a (hopefully temporary)
fork of it[2].

>> In fact I've looked at nixio before, but can't recall what I didn't
>> like about it, without digging into it again. On the other hand the
>> all-in-one approach is sadly appealing to someone who has spent too
>> long battling against different libraries and their various sore
>> points.
>
> I've been tempted by nixio. luasocket attempts to be "high-level" and
> "portable", but its reinventing of the BSD socket API has made it
> difficult for us to use.
>

I don't mind the fact that it is high-level, it's just annoying when I
need access to options and features it doesn't expose. And of course,
IPv6 :)

Matthew

[1]: http://repo.or.cz/w/luaevent.git
[2]: http://code.matthewwild.co.uk/luaevent-prosody