http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=262

           Summary: Missing DDoc comments in on Socket.blocking
           Product: D
           Version: 0.163
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Phobos
        AssignedTo: bugzilla@digitalmars.com
        ReportedBy: aldacron@gmail.com


Both the getter and the setter for the blocking property of Socket are missing DDoc comments. When reading the documentation, this makes it seem as if there is no way to configure a socket in blocking/non-blocking mode.


-- 

d-bugmail@puremagic.com wrote:
> Both the getter and the setter for the blocking property of Socket are missing
> DDoc comments. When reading the documentation, this makes it seem as if there
> is no way to configure a socket in blocking/non-blocking mode.


I know nothing about sockets. Can you provide some comments I can just paste in?

Something like this?

/// The socket's blocking flag.
/// When a socket is blocking, calls to receive(), accept(), and send() will block and wait for data/action.
/// A non-blocking socket will immediately return instead of blocking.
bool blocking() // getter

/// ditto
void blocking(bool byes) // setter

Too much, or not enough information?

Thanks,
-[Unknown]


> d-bugmail@puremagic.com wrote:
>> Both the getter and the setter for the blocking property of Socket are missing
>> DDoc comments. When reading the documentation, this makes it seem as if there
>> is no way to configure a socket in blocking/non-blocking mode.
> 
> 
> I know nothing about sockets. Can you provide some comments I can just paste in?

It looks like when Ddoc comments were added, the blocking documentation was added to the wrong element (_blocking (Windows only) instead of blocking() (there are 2 for get/set, one needs a ditto)). There also seems to be other missing ddoc comments, such as SocketSet.max (which should be documented in the old doc), and a few constructors (e.g. the exceptions) do not show what the parameters are (simple /// by them should be enough).

On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 15:41:12 -0400, Unknown W. Brackets <unknown@simplemachines.org> wrote:

> Something like this?
>
> /// The socket's blocking flag.
> /// When a socket is blocking, calls to receive(), accept(), and send() will block and wait for data/action.
> /// A non-blocking socket will immediately return instead of blocking.
> bool blocking() // getter
>
> /// ditto
> void blocking(bool byes) // setter
>
> Too much, or not enough information?
>
> Thanks,
> -[Unknown]
>
>
>> d-bugmail@puremagic.com wrote:
>>> Both the getter and the setter for the blocking property of Socket are missing
>>> DDoc comments. When reading the documentation, this makes it seem as if there
>>> is no way to configure a socket in blocking/non-blocking mode.
>>   I know nothing about sockets. Can you provide some comments I can just paste in?

Chris Miller wrote:
> It looks like when Ddoc comments were added, the blocking documentation was added to the wrong element (_blocking (Windows only) instead of blocking() (there are 2 for get/set, one needs a ditto)). There also seems to be other missing ddoc comments, such as SocketSet.max (which should be documented in the old doc), and a few constructors (e.g. the exceptions) do not show what the parameters are (simple /// by them should be enough).

I really borked both bug reports I posted about the socket module. I didn't examine anything beyond the blocking property methods. I should have noticed all of that myself and included it.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=262


bugzilla@digitalmars.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED




------- Comment #3 from bugzilla@digitalmars.com  2006-08-11 19:14 -------
Fixed DMD 0.164 (added suggested documentation)


--