Hello, Yes, it doesn't. When you call `uv_read_start()` it isn't really a request or action, so it should not receive UV_ECANCEL in any case.
Cheers, Fedor. On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Susheel Aroskar <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi, > > I assumed if I called uv_close on uv_tcp_t that has a read pending > (registered by calling uv_read_start earlier) it will cause uv_read_cb to > be invoked with nread < 0 to indicate an error. In my testing it does not > behave like this. The socket gets closed, if there us any connect request > pending on the same socket it's callback gets called, but if there is a > read request pending it's callback is never called. Is this expected > behavior? I even tried calling uv_read_stop before uv_close but that too > doesn't help. Am I missing something? I'm running my code on Mac OS X > (Maverick) > > Thanks, > > - Susheel > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "libuv" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/libuv. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "libuv" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/libuv. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
