On Thursday, 26 May 2016 at 20:10:57 UTC, ikod wrote:
Will it not hang in the loop if you send it SIGINT?
Looks like not, but is strange for me.
Yes, I had the same feeling the first time I came across that.
I remember why we had to use that loop in C: when we were using
gdb to do some debugg
On Thursday, 26 May 2016 at 19:40:35 UTC, Claude wrote:
On Thursday, 26 May 2016 at 18:44:22 UTC, ikod wrote:
Is there any recommended workaround for this problem? Is this
a bug?
I don't think it's a bug. Even without a GC, on GNU/Linux OS, I
would enclose the receive function (or any blockin
On Thursday, 26 May 2016 at 18:44:22 UTC, ikod wrote:
Is there any recommended workaround for this problem? Is this a
bug?
I don't think it's a bug. Even without a GC, on GNU/Linux OS, I
would enclose the receive function (or any blocking system
function like poll etc) in a do-while loop test
On Thursday, 26 May 2016 at 18:44:22 UTC, ikod wrote:
Hello,
On linux, in the code below, receive() returns -1 with
errno=EINTR if syscall is interrupted by GC (so you can see
several "insterrupted") when GC enabled, and prints nothing
(this is desired and expected behavior) when GC disabled.
Hello,
On linux, in the code below, receive() returns -1 with
errno=EINTR if syscall is interrupted by GC (so you can see
several "insterrupted") when GC enabled, and prints nothing (this
is desired and expected behavior) when GC disabled.
Looks like the reason of the problem is call sigacti
