[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking)
- From: Doug Currie <doug.currie@...>
- Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:22:34 -0500
On Friday, February 29, 2008 Diego Nehab wrote:
>> Is LusSocket mechanism flexible enough to handle local
>> sockets and file I/O?
> Local sockets, definitely. File I/O I don't see why not. I
> wonder if the OS implements non-blocking I/O on regular
> files. I have heard on this list that this is usually not
> the case. It will be fun to test.
Windows IOCP makes it pretty easy to use regular files, pipes,
sockets, and timers.
http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2006-01/msg00613.html
One difficulty with Lua file library compatibility is buffered io,
e.g., file:read("*l").
e
--
Doug Currie
Londonderry, NH, USA
- References:
- A proposal for faster userdata type checking, Chris
- Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking, Taj Khattra
- Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking, Diego Nehab
- LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking), Petite Abeille
- Re: LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking), Diego Nehab
- Re: LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking), Petite Abeille
- Re: LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking), Diego Nehab
- Re: LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking), Petite Abeille
- Re: LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking), Diego Nehab
- Re: LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking), Doug Currie
- Re: LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking), Javier Guerra
- Re: LuaSocket 3.0? (was Re: A proposal for faster userdata type checking), Diego Nehab