"Pierre R. Mai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Actually it should be much safer than the preemptive scheduler, in that > the only piece of code affected by the blocking state of the fd should be > the fd-stream machinery. And this was written with non-blocking > operations firmly in mind, although it probably hasn't been tested all > that much in real-world usage in recent times.
This is good news. I had the impression that non-blocking fds don't work very well, because I once used that with sys:read-n-bytes. AFAICT sys:read-n-bytes is not thread aware or ready for non-blocking fds. Took me some time to figure that out. [Btw, the manual has a typo: it says that read-n-bytes is in the ext package.] --helmut
