number of synchronizing semaphores per socket
Craig Latta
Craig.Latta at NetJam.ORG
Wed Nov 10 04:27:59 UTC 1999
Hi John--
At http://netjam.org/correspondents/advocacy.html I write:
> [Currently] there is only one Smalltalk semaphore provided for
> synchronization with all a socket's network events. It's possible
> to get a writeability signal while waiting for readability, and
> vice-versa. Also, one cannot wait for both at the same time. It is
> therefore not possible to correctly implement protocols in which
> separate Smalltalk Processes read from and write to a socket. The
> implementation requires that correctly-functioning protocols which
> use it will read and write sequentially in a single Smalltalk Process,
> consume all available incoming data before writing, and finish writing
> before new incoming data arrives. This is okay for simple call-response
> protocols like POP, but not for more complex ones like IRCP.
Why do you disagree with this?
thanks,
-C
--
Craig Latta
composer and computer scientist
craig.latta at netjam.org
www.netjam.org
latta at interval.com
Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|