apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Rethinking apr_socket_timeout_set
Date Sat, 25 Jun 2005 01:27:22 GMT
On 6/24/05, Paul Querna <chip@force-elite.com> wrote:

> >>>Why do you need a different timeout API?  It either works or it
> >>>doesn't.  Provide an implementation of send*/receive*/sockopt APIs
> >>>that can use SO_SNDTIMEO/O_RCVTIMEO, and enable it carefully.

> >>Because some applications might rely upon the API setting a socket to
> >>blocking or non-blocking based on the timeout.

> >They wouldn't work on Windows anyway, FWIW.

> >>It is documented to behave in this way,

> >Where?

> http://apr.apache.org/docs/apr/group__apr__network__io.html#ga26

>    t > 0  -- read and write calls return APR_TIMEUP if specified time
>              elapsess with no data read or written
>    t == 0 -- read and write calls never block
>    t < 0  -- read and write calls block
> 
> """
> 
> 'block', 'never block'.

That's talking about the APR call, not the syscall it uses under the covers.

Mime
View raw message