On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Chris Armstrong wrote:
A lot of people get confused by the term "Port". When they think "Port", they don't necessarily think of "something that sits on a port, and listens for incoming connections". That's just how I understand it. Another argument against Port is that it's not only for "waiting for incoming connections" -- clients also allocate ports when they connect to remote hosts. So, even technically, Port is an inaccurate term for this class. You might find other technical details that make "Listener" slightly inaccurate, but it still just Makes Sense to most people (I'm guessing -- DavidC_, after me using the word "Port", and explaining that I'd rather prefer "listener", told me he would've immediately understood what I was talking about if I had used that term from the beginning).
I'd be interested to hear more feedback on this. Do folks generally think that "listener" makes more sense than "port"?
Well my misunderstanding comes from already having worked with sockets. A tcp port is just a number attached to each packet. When you want to make a server you call listen() on a bound port number. You listen for people who want to talk to you. So you create a Listener.
By the way, spread.pb is neat.
name: David Creswick website: http://braznet.com/david jabber id: davec@jabber.org