[Ironruby-core] Code Review: socket2

Peter Bacon Darwin bacondarwin at googlemail.com
Wed May 7 16:36:50 EDT 2008

This seems reasonable to me but then I am not a seasoned Ruby Sockets user
so I don't know what level of support developers would expect.

Certainly for a first release I don't see why we couldn't get away without
Ruby Sockets support on Silverlight.  I doubt anyone coding up a Silverlight
Ruby app is going to worry that their code is portable to non-IronRuby

The big question is whether there are any libraries that require the Ruby
Socket library that might be of use to people writing Silverlight apps.


-----Original Message-----
From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org
[mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of John Lam
Sent: Wednesday,07 May 07, 2008 15:38
To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Code Review: socket2

Peter Bacon Darwin:

> The .NET Socket library is a fairly thin layer that sits on top of
> WinSock.
> Clearly Silverlight would not be able to do this since WinSock is not a
> standard API on other OSes. Also, Silverlight is going to have
> additional security restrictions that would prevent much of the Socket
> library from work anyway.
> To be honest, even the full .NET Framework socket implementation does
> not fully support all the features required by the Ruby socket library.
> I have been struggling to get the Socket class working - it is not
> pretty.

Do you think it would be worthwhile to just have folks use the .NET Socket
support in Silverlight and not bother having a "ruby" socket implementation?
In this case I still have to figure out how to conditionally compile stuff
against the same Initializer.Generated.cs - I might have to add a pre-build
step to force its generation.


Ironruby-core mailing list
Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org

More information about the Ironruby-core mailing list