Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 17:04, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I think what this shows is we should look for a way to avoid using
>> INADDR_NONE.
>> From some more googling
> (http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/inet_addr.html),
> it says it will return (in_addr_t)(-1), though, so maybe we should
> just move that #ifdef out to some global place?
Given the way that's written, I think we should just compare the result
to (in_addr_t)(-1), and not assume there's any macro provided for that.
However, now that I know the real issue is you're using inet_addr, I
would like to know why you're not using inet_aton instead; or even
better, something that also copes with IPv6.
regards, tom lane
