Document when channel.remoteAddress field can be nil
#3456
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Lukasa
reviewed
Nov 28, 2025
Sources/NIOCore/Channel.swift
Outdated
| /// | ||
| /// If we end up accepting an already-closed connection, the kernel can end up in a place | ||
| /// where it has no remote address to give us. In this situation, `remoteAddress` will be | ||
| /// `nil`. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The remote address can also be nil in cases where it isn't representable in SocketAddress, e.g. if we're talking over a vsock.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks. Just updated the comment.
Lukasa
approved these changes
Dec 1, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Added extra documentation to
channel.remoteAddressfield to capture a scenario where this field might benilMotivation:
It is somewhat common for users to have code like
channel.remoteAddress!in their implementation, as it is a reasonable assumption to think a socket connection will have an associated remote address. However, in at least one known situation this might not be the case. When that happens, user's code might crash due to the force unwrap of the optional field.Modifications:
Introduced more documentation to make it clear that users should be prepared to handle the
nilscenario.Result:
Less frequent mishandling of
channel.remoteAddress.