On Feb 17, 2014, at 8:28 AM, Gustavo Carneiro <[email protected]> wrote:
> I wish this sort of thing were a bit more intuitive in a future revision of > tulip. A synchronous close() would be helpful, I think. Actually I think this is great. This is reflecting a very real feature of networks in general: unless you receive acknowledgement from the remote application that your information was received, you really have no idea if the data was even transmitted all the way, let a lone processed. Making it as simple as "synchronous close()" is basically facilitating a newbie mistake; repeating the error of HTTP/0.9's the-body-is-over-when-the-connection-is-closed non-deterministic framing. You still need to be able to flush the transport somehow for tuning reasons, but it's good that people trip over this early. -glyph
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
