md md at realmwireless.com
Mon Nov 6 16:38:51 CET 2000

I would take Michael Van Canneyt's advice seriously in principle.

But in reality, the only input I can give is that Windows NT4.0 socket
performance sucks.  And is unstable.  Winsock 2 at 
least gives you some increase over standard sockets.  

I say unstable because Microsoft probably knows some trick on getting it
to work well, but they have not documented it.

So I say that you create your own interface that wraps the specifics of
Win32 as much as possible. That way portability 
is somewhat achieved.

Portable code is important, Win32 requires much tweaking and trial and
much error before
it works.  May I suggest Linux as a more capable platform?

Mark Diener

Michael.VanCanneyt at wisa.be wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, md wrote:
> > You will need to interface directly to Win32
> This is not true; ssockets() should function on win32 as well, it hasn't
> been tested, however.
> > - May I suggest looking at Winsock 2.
> Using winsock 2 would make your application dependent on win32, and not
> portable at all. So unless you know the application is only supposed to
> run on win32, I would not do that.
> Michael.
> _______________________________________________
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal at lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list