Thanks for the proposed change. I'm not sure about the Handshake interface, but either way we'd need to at least also have tests, and ideally an example that shows/documents how to use it.

Thanks for the proposed change. I'm not sure about the Handshake interface, but either way we'd need to at least also have tests, and ideally an example that shows/documents how to use it.

Definitely, didn't want to go too far down the rabbit hole if people didn't like the change. I'll spend some time making a test today. I can make an example as well.

The basic idea (if unclear) is that before one would do:

conn, err := ln.Accept()
if err != nil {
  return err
}
go handleConn(conn)

Now, one may do:

hs, err := ln.AcceptHandshake()
if err != nil {
  return err
}
go handleHandshaker(hs)

func handleHandshaker(hs Handshaker) {
  conn, err := hs.Handshake()
  if err != nil {
    return
  }
  handleConn(conn)
}

The only annoying thing is that the AcceptHandshake method won't be exported, so it'll require a type assertion unless a different type with this method exported is returned.

@daenney I've added a test + example. Let me know what needs changing, thanks!

@Sean-Der Care to take a look? This has come up before and it might just be nice to fix it. It's a backwards compatible change since folks can upgrade to the proposed Handshake method of doing it. I know we've discussed something similar to this at some point for a v3 too.

@daenney bump on this. Anything I can do to speed up the process?

No not really, things take time as we're all unpaid volunteers. A few other maintainers need to take a look, as adding new APIs has long-term-ish consequences. I'd want us to agree on an API we would also be happy with for v3, so if users switch we don't break them all over again.