On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 11:58 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > I took a look at the IDLE implementation last night and felt it went > about it the wrong way.
Note that the IDLE implementation got changed (reimplemented) this morning. Although the same problems that you mention here still apply. I also added some comments. The poll() idea is indeed something that at some point I should refactor the loop to. > Firstly, the added camel_stream_[read,write]_nb() and > camel_stream_read_idle() functionality is totally unnecessary and just > makes the camel stream API gross (not to mention duplicating a lot of > code as there's no real difference from the normal read/write > implementations other than the timeout). > > You should simply poll() on the socket descriptors (and a pipe fd used > for telling the IDLE thread's I/O loop to finish and send DONE). > > Jeff > > On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 00:41 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: > > On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 14:15 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: > > > Hi there, > > > > > Using this changeset you can follow the changes to camel-lite: > > > > > > http://tinymail.org/trac/tinymail/changeset/2823 > > > > > > > This changeset are a bunch of compilation warnings for Matthew's Base64 > > patch to Camel: http://tinymail.org/trac/tinymail/changeset/2827 > > > > > > ps. Adding Matthew in CC. > > > -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://www.pvanhoof.be/blog _______________________________________________ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolutionemail@example.com http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers