[#7872] Nonblocking socket-connect — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...>

All, I needed a nonblocking socket connect for my asynchronous-event

18 messages 2006/05/14
[#7873] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org> 2006/05/14

In article <3a94cf510605140559l7baa0205le341dac4f47d424b@mail.gmail.com>,

[#7874] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...> 2006/05/15

How about introducing the method Socket#set_nonblocking, or alternatively

[#7875] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/05/15

Hi,

[#7876] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...> 2006/05/15

Well, it's ok then. I'm comfortable adding in the nonblocking

[#7877] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/05/15

Hi,

Re: Nonblocking socket-connect

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2006-05-21 14:39:21 UTC
List: ruby-core #7914
Hi,

In message "Re: Nonblocking socket-connect"
    on Sat, 20 May 2006 17:01:03 +0900, Tanaka Akira <akr@m17n.org> writes:

|Do you find an acceptable name?
|
|    connect_nonblock 
|  nbconnect
|    connectnb
|    connect!
|
|    accept_nonblock
|  nbaccept
|    acceptnb
|
|    recvfrom_nonblock
|  nbrecvfrom

*_nonblock sound better than others from my POV.  Any opinion?
Is there any issue other than a name left?

							matz.

In This Thread