On 08/01/2014 10:33 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: > 2014-08-01 9:48 GMT+02:00 Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <[email protected]>: >> UV_RUN_ONCE doesn't imply not blocking waiting for i/o, that's what >> UV_RUN_NOWAIT does. > > Any real use case for UV_RUN_ONCE having UV_RUN_NOWAIT? > > I consider UV_RUN_ONCE a bit "problematic" given, exactly, the > rationale in your previous mail. This is, I consider extremely useless > blocking until a TCP connection is received, and then exit. No sense > IMHO. >
If you have a timer that kicks in 100ms, UV_RUN_ONCE will block for 100ms. What I showed was an example. > If there is no real use-cases for UV_RUN_ONCE (that cannot be achieved > with UV_RUN_DEFAULT and/or UV_RUN_NOWAIT) then I suggest dropping it. > Not going to happen. People embedding libuv into other event loops may want to iterate the loop at their own pace. UV_RUN_DEFAULT doesn't help because it will loop for ever, and UV_RUN_NOWAIT doesn't help either because it always does a zero tiemout poll. The fact that *you* don't need it doesn't mean other don't have a use for it. -- Saúl Ibarra Corretgé bettercallsaghul.com
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
