Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org
Newsgroups: comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:56:46 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <vljiru$297i9$1@dont-email.me>
References: <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <vlgud7$1mgh5$1@dont-email.me> <vlh5ag$1nruu$1@dont-email.me> <677c7a1b$0$28501$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <vljbvv$gl9$1@reader2.panix.com> <677d4e48$0$28053$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Injection-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2025 16:56:47 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8c5e3bb50f8ae50dc4390f343511cdc4";
	logging-data="2399817"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18QrXsq3JmLWq0t9JB1vNAz"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4aXm0uiQFl6gc/zXlxDgZRfZQG0=
Bytes: 1646

On 07 Jan 2025 15:54:48 GMT
Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> wibbled:
>Dan Cross, dans le message <vljbvv$gl9$1@reader2.panix.com>, a écrit :
>> This, however, does not follow.  I don't see why "poll" is
>> strictly required for IO concurrency.
>
>Well, try to do implement anything non-trivial involving I/O concurrency,
>including timeouts, clients causing other clients to abort, etc., with
>the common denominator of POSIX threads and come back telling us how you
>managed that.
>
>I tried, and stopped trying using threads for I/O concurrency.

For some mad reason it seems to be the way to do it in Windows and also Java
IIRC.