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

Zsbán Ambrus ambrus at math.bme.hu
Wed Nov 3 22:34:02 CET 2010

On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 9:52 PM, Marc Lehmann <schmorp at schmorp.de> wrote:
> 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.

Nah, I just mean it doesn't guarantee to automatically show a regular
file as (readable and) writable, so that you could have generic code
that can output something (eg. logs or errors or data) to either a
regular file or a pipe (without blocking the whole program if the pipe
is stuck for a moment), and doesn't have to check which kind of file
it is.  You've already said that libev doesn't do that though.


More information about the libev mailing list