Re: Timeout questions
Koji Namekata <[email protected]> Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:25:24 +0900
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.state-threads.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I get it! Thanks for your response. -- Namekata On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:25:33 +0000, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > > 1. In the reference, st_netfd_poll() section: > > > > "If the value of timeout is -1, this function blocks > > until a requested I/O event occurs or until the call > > is interrupted by st_thread_interrupt()". > > > > Is this true for other functions, say, st_accept(), > > st_read(), etc.? > > Yes, -1 means infinite timeout for all I/O functions taking > timeout argument. > > > > 2. Is there any reason why ST_UTIME_NO_TIMEOUT is not > > in st.h (public.h)? > > I guess the main reason is that "-1" is much shorter than > "ST_UTIME_NO_TIMEOUT" :) > > According to I/O function prototypes in st.h, timeout value -1 will be > treated as (st_utime_t)-1 or -1ULL which is exactly the same as > ST_UTIME_NO_TIMEOUT. > > --Gene ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/