On 2012.09.16 12:59, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Pete Batard wrote:
>> the error basically comes
>> from trying the following: _open("NUL", _O_WRONLY);
>
> I don't understand why the fd integer is allocated using _open()
> instead of allocating it in the library using a simple counter or so.Because "using a simple counter or so" requires more lines of codes to ensure we are emulating fd allocation than a one line call to the OS. If I had reasons to suspect that _open would not work on some stripped down version of Windows, I may have used something else. Except I didn't (and I don't see the limitation we've seen here, for which we appear to have a workaround, as something that requires urgent attention). In terms of stability and ease of implementation, you really can't beat an _existing_ OS call returning the data you need. As a matter of fact, if I had not used an OS call to return an fd, and added my own custom implementation, I'm pretty you would have been the one to ask "Since you need an fd-like thingy, why don't use just use an OS call that returns an actual fd?" Regards, /Pete ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;258768047;13503038;j? http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
