Re: Socket engines

From: Daniel Koepke (dkoepke@CALIFORNIA.COM)
Date: 08/30/97

On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Brian Gray wrote:

-+Has anyone here ever tried to rewrite the core socket engine?  I've been
-+doing a bit of research and was wondering if the current system of
-+select()'ing through the descriptor list is the best way to go.  Has
-+anyone tried SIGIO?  What about fork()'ing a separate process for each
-+descriptor and using normal UNIX IPC to communicate?  Anyone ever set up
-+pseudo terminals?  I'd love to get the actual sockets working
-+transparently, meaning output to stdout goes to the socket and stdin
-+reads from the socket.  Of course stderr would always point out to the logs.

select() is, in general, the best way short of multi-threading. fork()
uses too much system resources; and select() remains fairly simple,
straight-forward, and multi-functional. As for SIGIO, I haven't done
an indepth study on the matter, but it still seems as though select()
is more portable and straight-forward.

Daniel Koepke -:- -:-  [Shadowlord/Nether]

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST