Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind

> bigness of names doesn't matter. applications matter. i can see a use for
> both types, but they are inherently different types. a host that has a
> netmask which can be expressed in cidr notation is one such type. a net
> that has a netmask which must be expressed in cidr notation is another such
> type. the difference comes down to "host part must be zero" for the network
> type. there are also some minor differences in the input/output formats,
> since a host address always has four octets on both input and output, while
> a network only prints as many octets as the cidr width specifies, and these
> are the only required octets on input (though extra .0's can be specified).
>
> > I think we are just about there. If we go with my plan (completely
> > different functionality for now and fold it later) there should be
> > no API change later. There will be code and catalogue changes but
> > they should be relatively painless.
>
> so shall i test the inet_cidr_ functions and punt them on in?

Yep. Those are good points. Let's go.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026