MOO-cows Mailing List Archive


Re: read() subtlety

Gustavo Glusman wrote:

> This seems to imply that read() *always* suspends, even if input is
> already available thorugh that connection. But the behaviour seems to
> suggest that some of the read() calls are not suspending? How else
> could it run out of ticks on line 10?

I recall reading...either in the changelog, or in the programmer's manual
itself, that read() was modified in 1.8.0 to not suspend if there is input
pending in the connection's network buffer.

But I'm not sure...?


Home | Subject Index | Thread Index