On Thu Jan 10 04:43:32 2013, moritz wrote: > On Sat Jan 05 01:10:17 2013, FROGGS.de wrote: > > So if somebody doesnt know the chunk size, (s)he will be unable to use > > read() at all. _If_ you know the chunk size you can say: > > > > last if $data < $chunk-size > > If one doesn't know how much data to expect, one simply uses .recv. > Currently there's no version of .recv that returns a Buf (only Str), but > providing one is the proper fix.
By now, things have been sorted out so that: * read will do repeated socket reads to get sufficient data to meet what was requested, unless the connection is closed in which case it can return less; it'll never return more * recv will only ever do one actual recv on the socket, so if one read does not produce enough data, you'll just get a short result; the optional argument serves as an upper limit And these days, recv has a :bin parameter. Tests codifying this behavior in S32-io/socket-recv-vs-read.t.
