2009/4/21 erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net>: >> plan 9 and inferno rely quite heavily on having flush, >> and it's sometimes notable when servers don't implement it. >> for instance, inferno's file2chan provides no facility >> for flush notification, and wm/sh uses file2chan; thus if you >> kill a process that's reading from wm/sh's /dev/cons, >> the read goes ahead anyway, and a line of input is lost >> (you might have seen this if you ever used os(1)). > > isn't the race still there, just with a smaller window of > oppertunity?
sure, there's always a race if you allow flush. (but at least the results are well defined regardless of the winner). i was trying to point out that if you try to ignore the issue by removing flush from the protocol, you'll get a system that doesn't work so smoothly.
