Readv/writev patch

Corinna Vinschen
Wed Aug 28 03:37:00 GMT 2002

On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 04:02:43PM +0100, Conrad Scott wrote:
> I've tried to reduce the size of the patch by sending in some
> unrelated parts over the last couple of days but I realize that
> this is still quite large.  If you'ld like me to split the patch
> up (e.g. into the base fhandler part and the socket part), give me
> a call and I'll see if I can find the energy to do so; London's

Yes, please.  Especially I'm reluctant to introduce your changes
to the sendto and recvfrom implementation since I know there is
a good reason to use the WinSock1 calls in the non-blocking case
even though I don't recall why, right now.  Please skip that
beautyifing patches and just add the readv/writev functionality.

I've just checked in a patch which adds SIGPIPE handling to
sendto().  I'd appreciate if you could take this into account.

I also don't like these C++ cast operators since the Plain-C casts
are doing quite the same but are way easier to read.  Perhaps I'm
just old-fashioned.

And as you said, I think it would be wise to split the fhandler_base
from the fhandler_socket part.

Other than that it looks like a good patch.


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                      
Red Hat, Inc.

More information about the Cygwin-patches mailing list