From: Sean A. <ze...@wo...> - 2002-01-28 17:52:44
|
On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 08:46, Gabe Wachob wrote: > I'm thinking that the best way to replace all the datastream complexity > stuff is to simply use (for reading) an iterator interface which would > produce a series of BufferSegment objects (frame.BufferSegment). It > wouldn't be, strictly speaking, an iterator, because it would sometimes > return nothing when the "stream" wasn't closed but nothing was available > (ie non-blocking read). But otherwise an iterator. Could we perhaps build something with an exception in this case, which could be handled further up the object model? =20 > Thoughts? Do we have to worry about writing to these 'datastreams'? I think we do have to be able to construct output streams, which are just, at a low level buffer segments that get stuffed into frames then into the socket. So I don't think they need to be super complex. I have been working on the message test case and will probably do so for this morning as I have a free day. Sean=20 > This should be a lot easier than doing the whole stream thing... >=20 > -Gabe >=20 > --=20 > Gabe Wachob gw...@wa... > Personal http://www.wachob.com > CTO, WiredObjects http://www.wiredobjects.com >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Pybeep-devel mailing list > Pyb...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pybeep-devel |