[Stackless] Asyncronous IO (Was: Re: question about stackless)

[Christian Tismer]

Russ Cox wrote:
> It can be convenient to do I/O without being rescheduled.
> I think it makes more sense not to have any special handling
> of I/O built in, but rather to have a module that provides
> files that automatically schedule as you described, via 
> select or kqueue or whatever. 

Sounds like a good idea.

> You're right that you don't need a top-level event loop
> if you have good threading support (e.g., stackless),
> and that does make programs quite a bit easier to understand.
> 
> How I/O is implemented isn't really a feature of the
> interpreter per se, but rather a design choice in writing
> your own programs.  In many cases it's great to have read
> and write routines that devolve transparently into select
> so that you only need one OS thread.  But there are still
> cases when you'd want different OS threads to handle I/O,
> for example reading from disk files, which select doesn't
> address.  

This is why I first thought of kqueue: With kqueue, you
can also wait for file reads to become ready.
I have to learn more about the choices and find a good
abstraction.
Recommended material, which I'm working through now:
http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html

ciao - chris

-- 
Christian Tismer             :^)   <mailto:tismer at tismer.com>
Mission Impossible 5oftware  :     Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9a     :    *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14109 Berlin                 :     PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/
work +49 30 89 09 53 34  home +49 30 802 86 56  pager +49 173 24 18 776
PGP 0x57F3BF04       9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619  305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
      whom do you want to sponsor today?   http://www.stackless.com/


_______________________________________________
Stackless mailing list
Stackless at www.tismer.com
http://www.tismer.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless