Hi guys!

On 14/02/17 03:27, tim Rowledge wrote:
> All in all I’m not at all sure that having two forked processes
> working with the same socket stream is the best way to do this but it
> seems to work tolerably for now. Might it be better to have the
> socket reading process at a higher priority? I can’t think of a way
> to merge the two, which might be a better technique.

I wrote the current incarnation of SocketStream and I intentionally did 
not add any semaphore/mutex for protections. And yes, the SocketStream 
has internal state to know positions in buffers etc etc - so NO, you 
should not use two Processes with the same SocketStream.

Having said that...  if you have one process only writing and one only 
reading - you may get away with it - IIRC (no promises) the inBuffer and 
outBuffer (and associated ivars) may be 100% separated.

regards, Göran