From dev-return-2013-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Sat May 05 04:19:22 2001 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 46213 invoked by uid 500); 5 May 2001 04:19:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 46202 invoked from network); 5 May 2001 04:19:21 -0000 Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 00:19:26 -0400 From: Garrett Rooney To: Jeff Trawick Cc: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: apr/network_io/unix sendrecv.c Message-ID: <20010505001926.B7041@electricjellyfish.net> References: <20010503223802.28219.qmail@apache.org> <20010504161358.A49155@electricjellyfish.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from trawickj@bellsouth.net on Sat, May 05, 2001 at 12:11:26AM -0400 X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 12:11:26AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote: > If it were non-blocking, it would busy-loop while waiting for acks > from the client since there is no call to select or poll to wait for > writability. Extremely unlikely that such looping would go unnoticed :) well, like i said, it was just off the top of my head ;-) in that case, i have absolutely no idea why it would be in a loop... paranoia? -- garrett rooney Unix was not designed to stop you from rooneg@electricjellyfish.net doing stupid things, because that would http://electricjellyfish.net/ stop you from doing clever things.