> "JNP" == Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JNP> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 12:07:58PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> i haven't tried the patch you sent me but i should.
JNP> Yes please.
>> but others are
>> noticing this bug and are having problems with doing instal
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 03:35:27PM -0500, Rocco Caputo wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:56:23 -0500, barries wrote:
> >
> >In fact, I would be happy to port IPC::Run to Event or POE were either
> >cross platform wrt events on filehandles of all stripes and timers. I
> >gave some thought to doing t
Rocco Caputo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>MSWin32. I have no idea how well (or if) the fork/exec parts work,
>though. For that matter, what about SIGCHLD?
"Pipe forks" and SIGCHLD can be mad to work with ITHREADS pseudo-fork().
--
Nick Ing-Simmons
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 07:03:21AM -0500, "Horsley Tom" wrote:
> > First fork() emulation and now select()? If we are not careful in ten
> > years or so NT/W2K/W2010 will be almost as useful as UNIX was
> > in mid-1980's.
> Too late :-). WaitForMultipleObjects() on win32 is already *infinitely*
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:56:23 -0500, barries wrote:
>
>In fact, I would be happy to port IPC::Run to Event or POE were either
>cross platform wrt events on filehandles of all stripes and timers. I
>gave some thought to doing that anyway (see archives for spoor) and
>there's been no demand from any
> Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Barries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >Where do you recommend starting (once we've reviewed the PerlIO source)?
>
> Then review the win32/*.c files
>
> If you have someone that _really_ knows Win32 IO then they can start in
> on writing botto
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 07:03:21AM -0500, Horsley Tom wrote:
> > First fork() emulation and now select()? If we are not careful in ten
> > years or so NT/W2K/W2010 will be almost as useful as UNIX was
> > in mid-1980's.
>
> Too late :-). WaitForMultipleObjects() on win32 is already *infinitely*
> Then the only tricky bit is getting a wait-able Handle for each type of
> IO object. In some cases it may be necessary to have a helper thread
> doing blocking IO on the thing and "signaling" when it gets something.
Yep. For many types of devices or I/O, you can't wait on the handle
of the dev
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 12:07:58PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> i haven't tried the patch you sent me but i should.
Yes please.
> but others are
> noticing this bug and are having problems with doing installs using
> CPAN.pm. they are using the force option.
i think the fix is trivial. Pl
Barries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:46:07PM +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
>> Barries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Nick
>> >Ing-Simmons mentioned that there might be some possibility of and
>> >interest in porting the new poll() implementation to Win32, IIRC.
>>
>>
> First fork() emulation and now select()? If we are not careful in ten
> years or so NT/W2K/W2010 will be almost as useful as UNIX was
> in mid-1980's.
Too late :-). WaitForMultipleObjects() on win32 is already *infinitely*
more useful than select() or poll() since you can wait on all kinds
of
11 matches
Mail list logo