fwiw, I agree. Simpler is always better.
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Joseph Stewart <joseph.stewart@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Delio/Martin,
I support the coroutine per fd argument and hope Martin stays diligent to
this point.
After all, we're trying to get away from needing to explicitly multiplex
I/O and the complications that inevitably result from the state machine you
need to implement to maintain it.
It seems to me that the "one task per logical unit" will help to keep
simple things simple.
At least that's my $.02 worth. I obviously know nothing about your
use-case. :)
-joe
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi Delio,
Why not use a coroutine per fd?
Martin
On 2015-07-24 14:35, Delio Brignoli wrote:
Hello Martin,
Thanks for creating libmill it looks interesting and I like the
approach. I have a question about fdwait(): it waits for a single fd,
is this deliberate? Would a mechanism to wait for multiple fds be
useful or was libmill designed like this to enforce having a coroutine
for each fd one want to wait for?
Thanks
—
Delio
