[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: New Event API for Luasocket
- From: Steven Elkins <sgelkins@...>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 02:52:10 -0400
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 04:24:40 +0200, Mike Pall <email@example.com> wrote:
> Steven Elkins wrote:
> > Your document mentions one other source, signals, and says the feature
> > is "...probably much wanted." I want it. :-)
> Well, there are tons of race conditions lurking there. Whatever I come up
> with would be good enough for ctrl-c, kill -HUP and that kind of stuff.
This is plenty.
> It would be helpful if you describe the way you want to use signals
> in your application. Then I'll see what I can come up with.
Just need to be able to do things such as toggle tracing or notify the
far end we're shutting down.
> > Anyway, I'm very excited to learn of your plans. I write IP traffic
> > applications at work and I'm keenly interested in scriptable state
> > machines.
> This reaffirms my intuition that a passive event API is the only way
> to really make everyone happy. While I'm leaning towards a coroutine-based
> dispatcher on top of that (for scriptable heavy-duty network servers),
> you may be better off with a state machine based dispatcher.
That's certainly the current state of affairs and it constrains our
reactions to short durations. Having a coroutine-based dispatcher is
tempting since it'd make time-consuming reactions less disruptive. I
would probably give it a try but I'm wary of drifting into writing a