Nonblocking socket-connect

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yukihiro Matsumoto [mailto:matzruby-lang.org] 
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 10:15 AM
> To: ruby-coreruby-lang.org
> Subject: Re: Nonblocking socket-connect
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> In message "Re: Nonblocking socket-connect"
>     on Tue, 16 May 2006 00:42:39 +0900, "Francis
Cianfrocca" 
> <garbagecat10gmail.com> writes:
> 
> |Well, it's ok then. I'm comfortable adding in the 
> nonblocking functions 
> |as an extension in my asynchronous-IO framework. If
you decide it's 
> |best to leave nonblocking i/o out of the core, then
people 
> will be able 
> |to get it if necessary through my
"eventmachine" library.
> 
> Note that I'm not against for non-blocking connect.  I
just 
> oppose to general purpose non-blocking attribute for
IO.  
> Hint: name, name.
> 
> 							matz.

A separate AIO class as Python does?

A separate NIO class as Java does?

Just tossing ideas out there.

Dan


This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain
confidential or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this
communication is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this
communication 
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply
e-mail and destroy 
all copies of the communication and any attachments.

I have to admit, I seriously dislike AIO. In my experience,
it only
really works well on Windows (and believe me, I hate to
admit that).
I have to implement NIO anyway for eventmachine, so I'll
keep in mind
the possibility of a standalone class that would be separate
and
distinct from IO. If it turns out well, I'll propose it
here.

On 5/15/06, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Bergerqwest.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Yukihiro Matsumoto [mailto:matzruby-lang.org]
> > Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 10:15 AM
> > To: ruby-coreruby-lang.org
> > Subject: Re: Nonblocking socket-connect
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > In message "Re: Nonblocking
socket-connect"
> >     on Tue, 16 May 2006 00:42:39 +0900,
"Francis Cianfrocca"
> > <garbagecat10gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > |Well, it's ok then. I'm comfortable adding in
the
> > nonblocking functions
> > |as an extension in my asynchronous-IO framework.
If you decide it's
> > |best to leave nonblocking i/o out of the core,
then people
> > will be able
> > |to get it if necessary through my
"eventmachine" library.
> >
> > Note that I'm not against for non-blocking
connect.  I just
> > oppose to general purpose non-blocking attribute
for IO.
> > Hint: name, name.
> >
> >                                                   
   matz.
>
> A separate AIO class as Python does?
>
> A separate NIO class as Java does?
>
> Just tossing ideas out there.
>
> Dan
>
>
> This communication is the property of Qwest and may
contain confidential or
> privileged information. Unauthorized use of this
communication is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received
this communication
> in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply
e-mail and destroy
> all copies of the communication and any attachments.
>
>