Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 20:46:23 +0200
David Schwartz <davids@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Jun 2, 10:45 am, Rainer Weikusat <rweiku...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I didn't suggest anything as I have (as usually) already written a
couple of times. You were using a circular argument, which happened to
be the only reason for my original posting.
I don't know what you're talking about. I never used anything
resembling a circular argument.
I simply argued that there is no benefit to the operating system being
able to give you the additional information given the descriptor
because you can trivially find the additional information the same way
you found the descriptor, and that saves a trip to the kernel and
back.
[...]
How is that circular?
Because the only reason the information can 'trivially' be found by
the application is THAT THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- References:
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- From: Rainer Weikusat
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- From: Rainer Weikusat
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- From: Rainer Weikusat
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- Prev by Date: Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- Next by Date: Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- Previous by thread: Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- Next by thread: Re: Clumsy interface of epoll
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|