From owner-freebsd-current Mon Dec 1 21:56:58 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA02459 for current-outgoing; Mon, 1 Dec 1997 21:56:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.5.85]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02454 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 1997 21:56:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert@usr08.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA12943; Mon, 1 Dec 1997 22:56:51 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpd012909; Mon Dec 1 22:56:46 1997 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA16160; Mon, 1 Dec 1997 22:56:44 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199712020556.WAA16160@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: FYI: usage of new AIO calls To: toor@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson) Date: Tue, 2 Dec 1997 05:56:44 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, toor@dyson.iquest.net, current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199712020154.UAA08318@dyson.iquest.net> from "John S. Dyson" at Dec 1, 97 08:54:34 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > Some questions... > > > > 1) Why did you 'read' instead of 'aio_read'? > > Because that is what I chose to use in my example. aio_read works also. OK. I wasn't sure if there was some intentional advantage to using 'read' or simply a non-advantage to using 'aio_read' or what... > > 2) Why did you define your own interface instead of using the > > SunOS/Solaris/SVR4/SCO interface: > > Did I write POSIX IEEE Std 1003.1b-1993? You give me alot of credit, because > the functions that I implemented came from there. (refer to pages 151 > through 168 of the standards document.) The stuff is also the same as the > equivalents in The Open Group X/Open Spec. I really don't think that I > invented those interfaces also. I didn't realize that POSIX had invented Yet Another API. 8-(. Crap. Those idiots need to get their stuff together; it looks as if the standards are being pushed to try and gain "competitive advantage" again. The same reason the Single UNIX Specification is useless, and the same reason there isn't an API to turn of everything but the standard parts of an API. What is this vainglorious thing that UNIX has about trying to fragment its market as much as possible while at the same time ignoring the real threat from Redmond? It must be a deathwish or something... 8-(. You would think they would have at least Done The Right Thing and not implemented something that doesn't span all potentially blocking system calls. Sorry to blame you for their mistakes... 8-(. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.