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@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026