On Wednesday, 12 August 2020 at 1:43:16 am UTC+10 Ben Noordhuis wrote: > A uv_idle_t might be marginally more efficient (one fewer system call.) >
I took the various suggestions here and wrote a few different versions (timer with 0 delay and repeat, async, idle with idle stop call in callback). It turned out that the idle call led to nicer code anyway, and I expect for someone else to read is a little less surprising the alternatives. Is this something that might be useful in libuv in general? If I were to come back to this and open a PR to add such a thing, would it be worth the time, or unlikely to be generally useful? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "libuv" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/libuv/9b8a6469-7e23-43db-b621-1e3508b4ef6en%40googlegroups.com.
