[LAD] LADI

[fons at kokkinizita.net]

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 02:46:44PM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:

> Agreed. What I consider central is the idea of set of event sources,
> and event loop and handlers for events that are injected into the
> loop. There is no common framework for this on Unix, there never has
> been and as long design policy is made by developers who value choice
> and flexibility over single frameworks that enforce consistency, there
> almost certainly never will be. Hell, on Unix you can't even wait for
> file I/O and/or a signal in the same thread.

Hehe... It has been for at least 15 years my privately held but
otherwise not so humble ipinion that the 'ideal' interface to
everything Unix would be asynchronous and event driven. For 
example if you write to a file, you issue the command to do so
and some time later the system will inform you that it's done.
And of course you can build such things on top of the standard
read/write stuff, and we both are probably doing it. But it's a
bit sad having to do that if you suspect that on the other side
someone has done the inverse to provide the 'standard' synchronous
interface...

Ciao,

-- 
FA

Io lo dico sempre: l'Italia è troppo stretta e lunga.