[OT] why send()/recv() instead of write()/read()

Marc Lehmann schmorp at schmorp.de
Wed Nov 3 21:52:13 CET 2010

On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 08:46:07PM +0100, Zsbán Ambrus <ambrus at math.bme.hu> wrote:
> > Not only that, it means your code will be much more generic (it works with
> > non-sockets for example).
> Libev still doesn't support waiting on regular files, right?

The question makes no sense whatsoever - you don't need to "wait" for
files, because the information is already there, the file *is* known to be
readable or writable at any time, there is no such thing as a readable or
writable event, nor would it make any sense if there was.

What you probably mean is either stat changes (e.g. tail-like
applications), which are supported by libev for a long time now, or
asynchronous I/O, as opposed to event-based I/O, which libev supports just
fine in conjunction with it's async watchers and e.g. libeio.

                The choice of a       Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
      -----==-     _GNU_              http://www.deliantra.net
      ----==-- _       generation
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __      Marc Lehmann
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /      schmorp at schmorp.de
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\

More information about the libev mailing list