> You're asking for the pipe to be repeatedly opened, one uninterrupted glob of > bytes read and processed and then the pipe closed. Is that really what you > intend?
Yes, that was my intention, maybe a rethink is in order... > As written, this suggest a kind of "daemon" that monitors the pipe, > waiting for successive writers, each of which must write everything > they want processed by the far side in a single write call and > furthermore that transmission must not exceed the operating system's > pipe high-water mark. All this seems a bit fragile to me. > > But more practically, you should _say_ what you want your code to > accomplish. Store e-mail messages in a database (I am porting a program that already does this, as an exercise) + making it work through pipe (as java start-up is longish) => therefore I will have submitter and "daemon" receiver... > > Thanks for the explanations, the blocking is not a problem. ... > It was not clear whether or not your mention of the blocking behavior > was something you considered unexpected or problematic. No worries, I ment it as a hint, but this is also the 1st time I am woking with named pipe, so the explanations were welcome... But why it does not work with the "while" around the code still escapes me... Kind regards, Vlad PS: back tomorrow --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
