Hi,
I saw these definitions in lispworks.lisp:
#+win32 (fli:register-module "ws2_32")
(fli:define-foreign-function (get-host-name-internal "gethostname" :source) ((return-string (:reference-return (:ef-mb-string :limit 257))) (namelen :int)) :lambda-list (&aux (namelen 256) return-string) :result-type :int #+win32 :module #+win32 "ws2_32")
(defun get-host-name () (multiple-value-bind (retcode name) (get-host-name-internal) (when (= 0 retcode) name)))
What's the usage of GET-HOST-NAME? Can we use CL:MACHINE-INSTANCE instead? I think they have the same effect:
CL-USER 4 > (machine-instance) "binghe-mac.local"
CL-USER 5 > (usocket::get-host-name) "binghe-mac.local"
Thanks,
Chun TIAN (binghe)
On 2/1/08, Chun Tian (binghe) binghe.lisp@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I saw these definitions in lispworks.lisp:
#+win32 (fli:register-module "ws2_32")
(fli:define-foreign-function (get-host-name-internal "gethostname" :source) ((return-string (:reference-return (:ef-mb-string :limit 257))) (namelen :int)) :lambda-list (&aux (namelen 256) return-string) :result-type :int #+win32 :module #+win32 "ws2_32")
(defun get-host-name () (multiple-value-bind (retcode name) (get-host-name-internal) (when (= 0 retcode) name)))
What's the usage of GET-HOST-NAME? Can we use CL:MACHINE-INSTANCE instead? I think they have the same effect.
GET-HOST-NAME was added for cl-smtp, which depends on it. Is "machine-instance" documented to return the hostname of the current machine?
Bye,
Erik.
Hi,
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:45 AM, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
On 2/1/08, Chun Tian (binghe) binghe.lisp@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I saw these definitions in lispworks.lisp:
#+win32 (fli:register-module "ws2_32")
(fli:define-foreign-function (get-host-name-internal "gethostname" :source) ((return-string (:reference-return (:ef-mb-string :limit 257))) (namelen :int)) :lambda-list (&aux (namelen 256) return-string) :result-type :int #+win32 :module #+win32 "ws2_32")
(defun get-host-name () (multiple-value-bind (retcode name) (get-host-name-internal) (when (= 0 retcode) name)))
What's the usage of GET-HOST-NAME? Can we use CL:MACHINE-INSTANCE instead? I think they have the same effect.
GET-HOST-NAME was added for cl-smtp, which depends on it. Is "machine-instance" documented to return the hostname of the current machine?
I think it is. Yesterday I ask LispWorks Support about a FLI-function (system::gethostname) and got this answer from Martin Simmons:
You should certainly never call internal functions in the SYSTEM package!
Can you use CL:MACHINE-INSTANCE? This returns the hostname on Mac/ Linux and what Microsoft call the "NETBIOS name" on Windows.
Regards,
Martin Simmons LispWorks Technical Support http://www.lispworks.com/support/
Regards,
Chun TIAN (binghe)
Bye,
Erik.
On Feb 1, 2008 6:40 PM, Chun Tian (binghe) binghe.lisp@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:45 AM, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
On 2/1/08, Chun Tian (binghe) binghe.lisp@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I saw these definitions in lispworks.lisp:
#+win32 (fli:register-module "ws2_32")
(fli:define-foreign-function (get-host-name-internal "gethostname" :source) ((return-string (:reference-return (:ef-mb-string :limit 257))) (namelen :int)) :lambda-list (&aux (namelen 256) return-string) :result-type :int #+win32 :module #+win32 "ws2_32")
(defun get-host-name () (multiple-value-bind (retcode name) (get-host-name-internal) (when (= 0 retcode) name)))
What's the usage of GET-HOST-NAME? Can we use CL:MACHINE-INSTANCE instead? I think they have the same effect.
GET-HOST-NAME was added for cl-smtp, which depends on it. Is "machine-instance" documented to return the hostname of the current machine?
I think it is. Yesterday I ask LispWorks Support about a FLI-function (system::gethostname) and got this answer from Martin Simmons:
You should certainly never call internal functions in the SYSTEMpackage!
Can you use CL:MACHINE-INSTANCE? This returns the hostname on Mac/Linux and what Microsoft call the "NETBIOS name" on Windows.
Ah. Ok, well, there's a difference with gethostname: it will try to resolve to a fully qualified domain name (FQDN). When the FQDN resolution fails (ie, the system isn't able to determine its own "internet domain"), *then* it returns the "NETBIOS name". I think for cl-smtp, the current implementation is best.
Anyway, now that the current implementation is there, there's no real cost keeping it, is there? (In other words: why would we change working code?)
I'll send my ideas about implementing datagram sockets in a next mail this evening.
bye,
Erik.
-
Chun Tian (binghe) -
Erik Huelsmann