那么这两种socket处理方式有什么区别呢？
方案1直接处理socket，方案2则先将socket转换为fd，然后再转换为fileno：
S 1:
maxfd = (sock_client > sock_server ) ? sock_client : sock_server;
FD_ZERO(&rfds);
FD_SET(sock_client, &rfds);
FD_SET(sock_server, &rfds);
if ((n = select(maxfd+1, &rfds, NULL, NULL, &timeout)) < 0)
...
S 2:
sockrfp = fdopen( sockfd, "r" );
sockwfp = fdopen( sockfd, "w" );
client_read_fd = fileno( stdin );
server_read_fd = fileno( sockrfp );
client_write_fd = fileno( stdout );
server_write_fd = fileno( sockwfp )
if ( client_read_fd >= server_read_fd )
maxfd = client_read_fd;
else
maxfd = server_read_fd;
FD_ZERO( &fdset );
FD_SET( client_read_fd, &fdset );
FD_SET( server_read_fd, &fdset );
if ((n = select(maxfd+1, &rfds, NULL, NULL, &timeout)) < 0)
...
What's有什么区别？哪个更好？
solution 1 deals with socket directly,while solution 2 first converts socket to fd,and then converts to fileno:
S 1:
maxfd = (sock_client > sock_server ) ? sock_client : sock_server;
FD_ZERO(&rfds);
FD_SET(sock_client, &rfds);
FD_SET(sock_server, &rfds);
if ((n = select(maxfd+1, &rfds, NULL, NULL, &timeout)) < 0)
...
S 2:
sockrfp = fdopen( sockfd, "r" );
sockwfp = fdopen( sockfd, "w" );
client_read_fd = fileno( stdin );
server_read_fd = fileno( sockrfp );
client_write_fd = fileno( stdout );
server_write_fd = fileno( sockwfp )
if ( client_read_fd >= server_read_fd )
maxfd = client_read_fd;
else
maxfd = server_read_fd;
FD_ZERO( &fdset );
FD_SET( client_read_fd, &fdset );
FD_SET( server_read_fd, &fdset );
if ((n = select(maxfd+1, &rfds, NULL, NULL, &timeout)) < 0)
...
What's the difference?Which is better?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（1）
S1是正确的。从功能上来说，两者是相同的。 S1是直达的，而在S2，您只需绕行路线即可到达S1。 fdopen 后跟 fileno 产生与您开始时相同的结果...
socket() 或accept() 为您提供一个文件描述符（fd）。套接字 fd 上的 fdopen() 会生成一个 FILE* （文件指针）。文件指针上的 fileno() 会产生一个文件描述符 fd 返回。 FILE* 和 fd 是访问相同内部结构的不同方式（相当于 open 和 fopen）
套接字是双向的，您可以读取和写入同一个套接字 fd。在第二种情况下，您已将套接字 fd 拆分为读取和读取。写。 IMO，对套接字的调用应该读取 fdset &单独编写 fdset
[将评论复制到 @y26jin 提出的答案中]
S1 is correct. Functionally, both are same. S1 is direct and in S2, you just take a circuitous route to S1. fdopen followed by fileno yields the same where you started...
socket() or accept() gives you a file descriptor (fd). fdopen() on the socket fd yields you a FILE* (file pointer). fileno() on the file pointer yields you a file descriptor fd back. FILE* and fd are different ways of accessing the same internal structure (equivalent of open & fopen)
Sockets are bi-directional, you read and write to the same socket fd. In the second case, you have split the socket fd for read & write. IMO, call to socket should have read fdset & write fdset separate
[copied the comments into answer as sujjected by @y26jin]