From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kevin Ryde Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Unbuffered socket I/O Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:57:10 +1100 Message-ID: <87abz13kxl.fsf@zip.com.au> References: <87mz34ol6r.fsf@laas.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1172444258 29794 80.91.229.12 (25 Feb 2007 22:57:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 22:57:38 +0000 (UTC) To: Guile-Devel Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 25 23:57:24 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HLSJ1-0004fW-VJ for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:57:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HLSJ2-00061V-29 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:57:24 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HLSJ0-00061Q-3j for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:57:22 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HLSIy-00061E-LT for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:57:20 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HLSIy-00061B-G2 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:57:20 -0500 Original-Received: from mailout2-8.pacific.net.au ([61.8.2.231] helo=mailout2.pacific.net.au) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1HLSIx-0003MX-RG for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:57:20 -0500 Original-Received: from mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (mailproxy2.pacific.net.au [61.8.2.163]) by mailout2.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4873410B32E for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:57:13 +1100 (EST) Original-Received: from localhost (ppp246F.dyn.pacific.net.au [61.8.36.111]) by mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE872742C for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:57:16 +1100 (EST) Original-Received: from gg by localhost with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HLSIp-0001Yd-0m for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:57:11 +1100 Mail-Copies-To: never In-Reply-To: <87mz34ol6r.fsf@laas.fr> (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s's?= message of "Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:09:16 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:6561 Archived-At: ludovic.courtes@laas.fr (Ludovic Court=E8s) writes: > > Is there a reason why `SCM_SOCK_FD_TO_PORT ()' in `socket.c' asks for an > unbuffered port? To make send and receive conversations reliable, according to sockets section in the manual. (I don't think I added that. I hope I'm not claiming my own words as an authority!) Also of course send and recv! don't use the buffering, so there's no point having it when working with packets. > #define SCM_SOCK_FD_TO_PORT(fd) \ > scm_fdes_to_port (fd, "r", sym_socket) That's an incompatible change, I think, since it can leave unflushed data where previously it went straight out. Perhaps the unbuffering can be reiterated in the manual or docstrings in each of socket, socketpair and accept which create such ports. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel