Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add visionOS support #2000

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 3, 2024
Merged

Add visionOS support #2000

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 3, 2024

Conversation

rofferom
Copy link
Contributor

@rofferom rofferom commented Oct 2, 2024

Just enable the same code blocks than on iOS.

@djc
Copy link
Member

djc commented Oct 2, 2024

Hmm, I wonder if there is something better we can do, like treating all the Darwin stuff the same?

@rofferom
Copy link
Contributor Author

rofferom commented Oct 2, 2024

Yes it would be great, especially because tvos support is missing too. I haven't tested it yet, that's why it isn't included in the MR.

@djc
Copy link
Member

djc commented Oct 2, 2024

Do you know the right incantation for supporting everything Darwin at once?

@rofferom
Copy link
Contributor Author

rofferom commented Oct 3, 2024

I have seen this one #[cfg(target_vendor = "apple")]. Other projects are using the same strategy than Quinn (ring, socket2).

Actually, I don't know the possible limitations of #[cfg(target_vendor = "apple")].

@djc
Copy link
Member

djc commented Oct 3, 2024

#[cfg(target_vendor = "apple")] looks about right to me (I noticed std/core use it in a few places). @Ralith what do you think?

@rofferom
Copy link
Contributor Author

rofferom commented Oct 3, 2024

I have just added tvOS support with the current way to declare it. Waiting for Ralith's feedback to update the MR if required.

@djc
Copy link
Member

djc commented Oct 3, 2024

Curious to hear what you're building!

@Ralith
Copy link
Collaborator

Ralith commented Oct 3, 2024

#[cfg(target_vendor = "apple")] looks about right to me (I noticed std/core use it in a few places). @Ralith what do you think?

That seems very appealing. I don't know how we'd verify that it's exactly the semantics we'd want short of digging into rustc, but it's hard to imagine it's too far off. Maybe switch to it in a separate commit so we can easily revert if needed?

@djc djc added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 3, 2024
Merged via the queue into quinn-rs:main with commit 08ee9ee Oct 3, 2024
14 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants