Sorry for the double-reply Matthias, but I forgot to CC -cafe (GMail labs isn't working, so reply-to-all is no longer the default for me :( ). On 3 June 2010 13:10, Matthias Reisner wrote:

there's something wrong with port numbers in the Network.Socket module of package network. Printing values gives:

*Main> PortNum 8888 47138 *Main> PortNum 47138 8888

This happens to me as well (self-built GHC 6.12.2 with network 2.2.1.7 on some random Ubuntu version I use at uni).

So I thought it's just an error in the show instance of PortNumber, which shows the bytes flipped. But if I use the following code snippet

sock <- socket AF_INET Datagram 0 bindSocket sock $ SockAddrInet (PortNum 8888) iNADDR_ANY

to bind a socket to port 8888, netstat and TCPView reveal that the socket is actually bound to the wrong port 47138. I'm using network-2.2.1.7 on Windows XP. Is that a bug or am I doing something wrong here?

Tried testing this as well; not sure how to test if the binding worked but "netstat --numeric-ports" didn't contain 8888 or 47138. -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic Ivan.Miljenovic@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com

On 2010-06-03 05:10, Matthias Reisner wrote:

Hi,

there's something wrong with port numbers in the Network.Socket module of package network. Printing values gives:

*Main> PortNum 8888 47138 *Main> PortNum 47138 8888

Try (fromIntegral 8888) :: PortNumber (Yes, it's weird.) Cheers, Bardur

On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Matthias Reisner wrote:

Hi,

there's something wrong with port numbers in the Network.Socket module of package network. Printing values gives:

  *Main> PortNum 8888   47138   *Main> PortNum 47138   8888

So I thought it's just an error in the show instance of PortNumber, which shows the bytes flipped. But if I use the following code snippet

  sock <- socket AF_INET Datagram 0   bindSocket sock $ SockAddrInet (PortNum 8888) iNADDR_ANY

to bind a socket to port 8888, netstat and TCPView reveal that the socket is actually bound to the wrong port 47138. I'm using network-2.2.1.7 on Windows XP. Is that a bug or am I doing something wrong here?

Hi Matthias, The PortNum constructor should rarely be used directly - it contains the port number in network-order. You should try: bindSocket sock $ SockAddrInet 8888 iNADDR_ANY Here I'm we're a numeric literal, which implicitly calls (fromIntegral 8888), which correctly converts to network order for us. It's not obvious from that haddocks that this is the way to go. Take care, Antoine