> > That said, I think the use of sdasync should be avoided for > non-trivial > applications. It is not portable. And for a serious app it would be > better to seperate the processing of critical information > exchange from > the user interface.
I'm confused. My code most of the time has some TCP transfer in progress, and often a dozen at a time running simultaneously. The sockets have to be non-blocking. What alternative is there to sdasync? I suppose I could do an sdselect out of sys_timer, but that seems strained since the socket events should provide a timelier interrupt. In any case, I've never had trouble with losing events. I run with tnomsgs set. Henry Rich ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
