ok, I'll use process.nextTick instead. On 2月1日, 下午7时50分, Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:42 AM, darcy <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes, I mean write+callback can be sync in some cases. > > If the callback should be promised to be async, we can use > > process.nextTick(cb.bind(this)) in Socket._write(). > > But I think in userland it's not important whether write callback is sync or > > async. And in current implement callback is also sync if some error occurs. > > The callback should always be asynchronous (i.e. run on the next > tick), or you introduce the risk of stack overflows. > > Consider this code: > > var conn = net.connect(/* ... */, function() { > function write() { conn.write('PING', write) } > write(); > }); > > If the network connection is fast enough that the write always > succeeds and the callback is synchronous, you'll overflow the call > stack in seconds flat.
-- -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
