Open event needed for TCPServerSocket and UDPSocket?

[ClaesNilsson]

[Patrick]

• the server socket API doesn't need an onOpen event.. there is
  nothing that happens in between the constructor and onOpen that could
  block

[Ke-Fong]: socket() + bind() + listen() have "immediate" non blocking
effect indeed.

[Claes] [Claes] The reason for the open event for TCPServerSocket and UDPSocket was the concern that Jonas expressed in #24 but if there is no time consuming actions, e.g. allocating a local interface, we should remove the open event.

[ClaesNilsson]

Could one argument for keeping the 'open' event be that it might take some time to check if the selected local address/port pair is already in use by another application?

[marcoscaceres]

I would kill it for now and add it back in later if the issue you mentioned occurs in practice.

[ClaesNilsson]

The open event has been replaced by the opened attribute which is of type Promise. We could consider if this attribute could be removed for UDP and TCPServer sockets and consider the closed attribute to cover error handling.