From: George Foot Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Network programming Date: 6 Feb 1998 16:54:17 GMT Organization: Oxford University, England Message-ID: <6bff7p$7l3$1@news.ox.ac.uk> References: <6aq97c$jfp$1 AT bohol DOT infocom DOT sequel DOT net> <34D0BCFF DOT 6ADA AT cornell DOT edu> <34d1d234 DOT 5891844 AT news DOT jet DOT es> <6asvj2$5c4$8 AT news DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk> <34DB1032 DOT 7168D0C0 AT sis DOT co DOT at> NNTP-Posting-Host: sable.ox.ac.uk Lines: 27 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk On Fri, 06 Feb 1998 14:29:22 +0100 in comp.os.msdos.djgpp Gruber Gerhard wrote: : George Foot wrote: : > Tests show that the Winsock is actually quite a fast way to : > communicate. It only supports AF_INET with [SOCK_STREAM and : > IPPROTO_TCP] or [SOCK_DGRAM and IPPROTO_UDP] though. : > : > If you're really interested in more details on this, let me know : > privately and I can explain in more detail/accuracy and send examples. : Wouldn't it be good to put this explanation into a FAQ or some thing : like that? I think that there are more people interested in this : (including me :) ). It probably is in an FAQ somewhere; have you looked around for sockets tutorials? Being able to communicate between processes is quite a common thing; once you understand how sockets are organised it's fairly clear that you can loop back to the same machine. Indeed, if you do a getsockname on an unconnected socket you invariably get the localhost address of that socket -- 127.0.0.1:some_port. -- george DOT foot AT merton DOT oxford DOT ac DOT uk Remember what happened to the dinosaur.