Hi Jochen,
Thanks for the speedy reply and apologies to the list for
the blank mails (I blame IE (my fault for using it though I
guess)).
--- Jochen Stenzel wrote:
> > This code is called from an Event 0.81 io watcher, and
> > $socket is $event->w->fd.
>
> Well, this *should* work, but honestly spoken I never
> tried it this way.
> I usually make the IPC::LDT object *with* the socket and
> pass it as an
> argument to the callback, avoiding to construct (and
> destroy) an
> IPC::LDT object with every callback invokation.
Fine as long as you don't want to send messages via a
socket created after registration of the watcher (unless
you create a registry of sockets, which seems pretty nasty
to me).
Part of my code uses preopened sockets and part does not,
so I converted the part that did to use the method you
described...
> Here's a simplified example:
>
> - snip --
...
> - snip --
>
... and this solved the problem. The send_socket coupled
with the receive_socket used by the code was used by
several different event callback functions to send messages
(nasty, perhaps), but as I understand it the nature of the
event handler is that everything runs in a single thread,
and therefore that there will be only one attempt to write
to the socket at any one time. Does anyone know if the
event handler really fork()s?
> > Argument "^E^D^B" isn't numeric in subtraction (-) at
> > <perlpath>/lib/site_perl/5.6.0/IPC/LDT.pm line 1131.
>
> Hm. Is it possible to send me code to reproduce this
> behaviour? I wonder
> where this string comes from ...
It's entirely reproducable with my code, but I can't
release that I'm afraid. I might try to trim it down to
isolate the problem and post an example, but now it works I
might not get around to it ;-).
The message being sent was generated by the line:
my %msg = ( what=>"SCAN_BAY" );
Out of interest, later errors caused by subsequent calls to
the message handling callback produced different strings in
the error message, some of which I recognised as data from
my message hash.
I also observed that the message handler received a large
number of calls once $ldt->receive had failed, suggesting
that we'd lost the message header and were being sent the
rest of the data. Presumably $ldt->receive eats the header
in order to check for validity...
Anyway, thanks again for the help.
Alex Farrell.
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
