ves the IO issue before then.
My girlfriend is moving to Boston, so that should help a lot. :)
- Scott
P.S. This is all licensed under the same terms as Parrot: GPL or
Artistic 2.0, your choice.
// io.h
// Scott Bronson
// 2 Oct 2003
// This is the generic Async I/O API. It can be implemented
e swamps?
>> none that i have heard of can swim all swamps. we could be
>> pioneers here! they may name some swamp after parrot!
DS> Or we could burn down, fall over, then sink into the swamp. You
DS> never know... :) -- Dan
but someday, all of this could be OURS!
just ima
At 6:17 PM -0400 7/3/03, Uri Guttman wrote:
> "TB" == Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TB> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:10:23PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
>> > "AB" == Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
AB> Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> >> The more I think about this the mo
At 11:02 PM +0100 7/3/03, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:10:23PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> "AB" == Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AB> Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> The more I think about this the more I want to punt on the whole
>> idea. Cross-platform async IO is
> "TB" == Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TB> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:10:23PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
>> > "AB" == Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
AB> Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> >> The more I think about this the more I want to punt on the whole
>> >> idea.
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:10:23PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "AB" == Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> AB> Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >> The more I think about this the more I want to punt on the whole
> >> idea. Cross-platform async IO is just one big swamp.
>
> AB> Agreed
Uri Guttman wrote:
who here will be at oscon (or yapc::eu)? i would like to get a small BOF
going on this subject. i agree it is a morass but i have some ideas and
i know dan has plenty. but we had better learn to swim these swamps and
not get eaten by the gators. we can drain them, convert them t
> "AB" == Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AB> Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> The more I think about this the more I want to punt on the whole
>> idea. Cross-platform async IO is just one big swamp.
AB> Agreed. Glug, glug, glug ;-)
who here will be at oscon (or yapc::eu)? i wou
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 04:24:05AM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> well, my question then is how does solaris do it? it can't be done with
> user level libs alone. what system calls does it use? undocumented ones
> perhaps with the libs as the public api?
> i finally found how solaris does its AIO un
> "TH" == Tom Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TH> I can't see any reference to threads in the Solaris manual pages
TH> either. Certainly Unixware does:
TH> I thought that using threads was the standard SVR4 implementation
TH> but maybe Solaris has moved away from that.
well, my q
>>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> At 05:35 PM 9/21/00 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
>> i proposed some of that in my rfc47 (universal async i/o). at the perl
>> level you need a delivery interface as with events.
DS>
7;d let us get another
> DS> burst of speed in some spots, particularly when slurping through
> DS> files sequentially (which is what's done maybe 95% of the time).
>
>i proposed some of that in my rfc47 (universal async i/o). at the perl
>level you need a delivery interface as w
rly when slurping through
DS> files sequentially (which is what's done maybe 95% of the time).
i proposed some of that in my rfc47 (universal async i/o). at the perl
level you need a delivery interface as with events. internally i see it
being useful too for the speedup of sequential files. b
13 matches
Mail list logo
