On Monday 25 November 2002 05:27 pm, Jason Wood wrote: > On Monday 25 Nov 2002 3:20 pm, Rolf Dubitzky wrote: > > Ah, didn't know about select() :-) > > The idea was not to have idle looping though, if the main loop wasn't doing > anything important, it would sleep() until it needed to do someting. I am > unsure as to how this would affect latency though.
Not at all (if you sleep with select ;-) > > sure we, can. just remove any double newlines from the buffer before > > sending. > > What I mean is that it is a slight hack to the XML format, and I don't like > that idea very much. If we go the SAX way (which makes much more sense than DOM) and SAX can handle incomplete XML. We don't need to do it. > I just did a quick search and found this message, which is of somebody > discussing how they did XML over TCP : > > http://www.distributedcoalition.org/mailing_lists/dist-obj/msg02872.html > > I know that SAX is more difficult to parse - that's why I wanted to use DOM > instead :-) But I think in our case it will be more hassle to use DOM than > it will be to use SAX, because with SAX we don't need to worry about > determining the end of a message with any constructs other than plain XML. Ok. Convinced. -- Cheers, Rolf *************************************************************** Rolf Dubitzky e-mail: Rolf.Dubitzky at Physik.TU-Dresden.de s-mail see http://hep.phy.tu-dresden.de/~dubitzky/ ***************************************************************
