RE: [clisp-list] TCP-based Network Server in CLISP

[Dave R. <da...@sy...>]

> I find the current discussion about low-water-marks and using
> lots of special socket flags likely to run into trouble with all
> the many TCP/IP stacks around.

This is true.  The low-water mark approach was an attempt at addressing the
non-partial write() problem.  Since neither OS I was testing with supports
it, it's fair to suggest that there are likely to be problems.

The :so-snd/rcvbuf really only address server performance.  :so-keepalive
and :so-oobinline, however, address correctness issues.

> May I suggest something simple, like what I believe many other
> programmers in other Lisps or languages do and which is portable
> for sockets: in non-blocking mode, you can read _as much as is
> available_ using a single read(). I think you can also write() a
> large number, and the OS will tell you that it couldn't write all
> and tell you how much it actually wrote. It's then up to you/the
> application to deal with sending the rest at a later time.

Yes, the final solution is going to require:

	- an interface to select()
	- non-blocking sockets
	- interfaces to partial read()/write()

I'd also like an interface to the real interbal time, which is currently
unavailable because the interruptprocessing logic is using it.

I am quickly coming to the conclusion that CMUCL is a better platform for
this application as these interfaces already exist.

	Dave