Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 15:21:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Belits <abelits@phobos.illtel.denver.co.us> To: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> Cc: Andrew Gierth <andrew@erlenstar.demon.co.uk>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: socketpair() Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970511150951.1638F-100000@phobos.illtel.denver.co.us> In-Reply-To: <199705111800.NAA08334@dyson.iquest.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 11 May 1997, John S. Dyson wrote: > > Is there actually any good reason for having bidirectional pipes, other > > than for coping with code ported from SVR4? > > > I am neutral on them. Since they were cheap to add (someone else originally > made our pipes bidirectional), I can't see a reason for not having them, > except perhaps those who port from FreeBSD to other OSes. > > Whatever whomever added them wants, I'll be happy with the decision. As I understand, bidirectional pipes in SVR4 are only a side effect of STREAMS, and original BSD anonymous pipes (as they are described everywhere and treated by programmers) are unidirectional. I never seen any code, for BSD or SysV, that depends on bidirectional anonymous pipes (for bidirectional connection two pipes are always used). -- Alex
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.3.95.970511150951.1638F-100000>