On 10 May 2006 12:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 10:11:35PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> So far so good, but if anyone sees anything glaring might as well point it
>> out - although this is not really CW related at this point.
>>
>> -cl
>
> Just to follow up on
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 10:11:35PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> So far so good, but if anyone sees anything glaring might as well point it
> out - although this is not really CW related at this point.
>
> -cl
Just to follow up on this.. I did take your advice fully Dave, and decided
to ju
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 03:54:16PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> > You cannot
> > even use the idiom of "well let me just get the rest of this here and I'll
> > make a request for the dropped data after."
>
> Yes you absolutely can. Who said you can't? You're just not trying. It
> works fine.
We
On 09 May 2006 15:36, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Well, to me this looks like a variation on the classic error made when
>> coding applications which use tcp. Specifically that there is a 1<->1
>> crrespondence between sends( write, writev, etc) on the sending side to
>> rcvs(read, readv, etc) on
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 07:00:57AM -0700, Mark Pizzolato wrote:
> > 67
> > 68 for (error = 0; !error; ) {
> > 69 error = 1;
> > 70
> > 71 if ((hl = n_recv_iov(s, packet, NE(packet), 60))
> >== (size_t)-1)
> > 72
On 09 May 2006 08:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 2. What exactly is the purpose of dummytest() within
> /winsup/cygwin/miscfuncs.cc?
> The actual check_iovec() call with preceeding dummytest():
>
> 162 static char __attribute__ ((noinline))
> 163 dummytest (volatile char *p)
> 164 {
On Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:44 AM clayne wrote:
[...]
My actual readv() wrapping code is very basic and standard, so I don't
think
it's doing anything evil or causing a problem:
400 size_t n_recv_iov(int s, const struct iovec *v, size_t c, int
tout)
401 {
402 size_t
7 matches
Mail list logo
