Hi,
the fport fill input code provides a way to avoid some threaded
deadlocks with fport_wait_for_input. I appreciate this tremendously!
Should this protection be extended to 'accept' in the socket code to
prevent the entire runtime from blocking if a thread blocks on accept?
Cheers,
Ciao,
with GOOPS I am adding methods to FOR-EACH; with:
(define-method (for-each (proc )
(L )
(S ) . args)
(apply stream-for-each proc L S args))
I see a strange bug: STREAM-FOR-EACH is my C implemented
procedure and it completes successful
Ciao,
I think that it is time for a chat on the future of Guile.
It is a difficult topic, but: the sooner, the better. The
plan I outline below requires a lot of work and a lot of
discussion, and I can volunteer only for some of it. But of
what use is the silence?
It seems clear to me
Ciao,
"dskr" wrote:
>Should this protection be extended to 'accept' in the socket
>code to prevent the entire runtime from blocking if a thread
>blocks on accept?
I am not an expert in networking, but it seems to me that to
avoid blocking you need to make the server socket non-blocking.
I dunno w
