Comment by huhtenberg
13 years ago
A scalable variation of BSD socket API is supported by every major OS with a sole exception of Windows. It's an abstraction that is both simpler and more universal than IOCP model, not to mention that it also predates it by a decade.
So "LOL!" yourself, bud.
> A scalable variation of BSD socket API is supported by every major OS with a sole exception of Windows
It's funny, you mention "epoll, signalfd, timerfd" as an example of a portable API, and then when I point out they're Linux APIs, you suddenly start talking about "a scalable variation" of the BSD sockets API. As for your "scalable variation of BSD sockets API", why don't you tell us the name so we know what you're referring to? Are you talking about Kqueue for example, or something else?
> an abstraction that is both simpler
I/O completion ports are just read-write queues... you ReadFile(), and when it's done, an item goes into the queue. (You can insert your own tasks into the queue, too, if you want.) Now just pop off the next item in the queue and off goes your thread. What part of that was so complex compared to your portable API (which for some reason you didn't feel was appropriate to mention the name of)?
> and more universal
Can't reply to it without knowing what "scalable variation" you're referring to, and why you didn't actually mention it as an example of portability when you were actually talking about the subject. Is portability actually a concern for you or no? (If it is, why did you bring up non-portable examples?!)
> you mention "epoll, signalfd, timerfd"
It wasn't me who mentioned it.
D'oh, sorry for the mixup. You were completely supporting that user so I didn't realize you were different people.
My comment remains essentially unchanged, though, with the same question as before:
What's this great portable API you're referring to?