From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alain Schneble Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Asynchronous DNS Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 12:41:08 +0100 Message-ID: <86io20n3xn.fsf@realize.ch> References: <87si1gx6wz.fsf@gnus.org> <86y4b5zvzt.fsf@gmail.com> <8760y9kwrk.fsf@gnus.org> <8760y7nag7.fsf@gnus.org> <83oabzzsjq.fsf@gnu.org> <87fuxazkfe.fsf@gnus.org> <83io25yeqk.fsf@gnu.org> <87h9hpnreg.fsf@gnus.org> <83y4b0wi7m.fsf@gnu.org> <87si17evk6.fsf@gnus.org> <83twlnvcz2.fsf@gnu.org> <87vb63obm3.fsf@gnus.org> <87r3gqmg6g.fsf@gnus.org> <83egcqtfnm.fsf@gnu.org> <86mvrdmk8p.fsf@realize.ch> <877fihjo4m.fsf@gnus.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454845312 8579 80.91.229.3 (7 Feb 2016 11:41:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 11:41:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 07 12:41:51 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aSNiv-000439-IS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 12:41:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33562 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSNiu-0003OS-O2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:41:48 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59934) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSNig-0003OM-SR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:41:35 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSNif-0004LZ-Oi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:41:34 -0500 Original-Received: from clientmail.realize.ch ([46.140.89.53]:1414) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSNia-0004LD-9P; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 06:41:28 -0500 Original-Received: from rintintin.hq.realize.ch.lan.rit ([192.168.0.105]) by clientmail.realize.ch ; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 12:41:18 +0100 Original-Received: from MYNGB (192.168.66.64) by rintintin.hq.realize.ch.lan.rit (192.168.0.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.516.32; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 12:41:05 +0100 In-Reply-To: <877fihjo4m.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Sun, 07 Feb 2016 12:38:33 +1100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (windows-nt) X-ClientProxiedBy: rintintin.hq.realize.ch.lan.rit (192.168.0.105) To rintintin.hq.realize.ch.lan.rit (192.168.0.105) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Windows NT kernel [generic] X-Received-From: 46.140.89.53 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:199441 Archived-At: Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > Perhaps 'dns is the wrong symbol to use for :nowait, since it isn't > really about DNS, but getting a fully asynchronous connection. That is, > :nowait t gives us a fully set up socket, really (seen from the > application point of view). Perhaps :nowait 'immediate or something > would make more sense than :nowait 'dns, which is, after all, just an > implementation detail. Agreed. A name reflecting more the level of "asynchronicity" would be a better choice and less misleading, I think. But as said, even better would be a solution where this distinction is not necessary at all, IMHO. But you tried it out and the only feasible approach I see would be what Eli Zaretskii proposed, IIUC, to block and synchronously wait for DNS resolve completion and socket initialization in all the functions requiring a Lisp process having "valid" infd and/or outfd set. OTOH, that sounds quite invasive to those functions, doesn't it? >> I guess changing the semantics of :nowait t, to say that clients shall >> not use the returned process before connection is established, is out of >> discussion, right? > > Yes. Alright, thanks for clarifying this.