Using sockets

[Mark Schonewille]

Hi Pete,

Somehow, your server doesn't return data to client on the socket that 
the client expects.

The extra number might be a socket identifier. By using the socket, you 
can distinguish connections with different clients: 
127.0.0.1:10100|213213 and 127.0.0.1:10100|567657 are two different sockets.

If the client connects to a server and the new socket opened on the 
server side is 127.0.0.1:10100|567657 but you read from socket 
127.0.0.1:10100 with a callback message, a message will never be 
received on that socket and eventually the socketTimeout message will be 
triggered.

If this doesnt solve it, can you post your script to show the problem?

If you want a complete example using sockets, you can read the telnet 
example on my blog at http://qery.us/43g and if you happen to have my 
book, you can also read about sockets there in chapter 18 ;-)

--
Best regards,

Mark Schonewille

Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering
Homepage: http://economy-x-talk.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/xtalkprogrammer
KvK: 50277553

Use Color Converter to convert CMYK, RGB, RAL, XYZ, H.Lab and other 
colour spaces. http://www.color-converter.com

Buy my new book "Programming LiveCode for the Real Beginner" 
http://qery.us/3fi

Fill out this survey please
http://livecodebeginner.economy-x-talk.com/survey/

On 1/14/2014 18:22, Peter Haworth wrote:
> Diving into yet another new are of Livecode for me - sockets.
>
> My server issues an accept statement for port 10100.  My client opens
> socket 10100.  WHen the client connects to the server, the port number I
> get is not 10100, but some other number which changes on each connection.
>   When sending messages between the client and server, which of these
> numbers should I use?
>
> My server uses read from socket with a callback message specified.  I have
> a socketTimeout message handler which fires every time the
> socketTimeoutInterval expires.  I thought the "read from socket with
> message" command was blocking and everything would stop until a message is
> received.  If that's the case, it seems odd that these timeouts should
> occur?
>
> Pete
> lcSQL Software <http://www.lcsql.com>