From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27090 invoked from network); 8 May 2002 16:25:09 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 8 May 2002 16:25:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 16640 invoked by alias); 8 May 2002 16:24:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 17100 Received: (qmail 16622 invoked from network); 8 May 2002 16:24:56 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <1020508155545.ZM7875@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 15:55:45 +0000 In-Reply-To: <8259.1020851945@csr.com> Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson "Re: PATCH: zselect builtin." (May 8, 10:59am) References: <8259.1020851945@csr.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: Peter Stephenson , zsh-workers@sunsite.dk (Zsh hackers list) Subject: Re: PATCH: zselect builtin. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On May 8, 10:59am, Peter Stephenson wrote: } Subject: Re: PATCH: zselect builtin. } } > Aso you probably can't fully utilize select without non-blocking I/O. } } I don't see this; you can already poll a blocking fd using a zero } timeout. The problem is not blocking reads, but blocking *writes*. However, even non-blocking write is not sufficient if you can't find out what subset of the bytes got written and try again with the remainder. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net