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
|
