[Glass] Is there a #upToEnd kind of read for a none blocking GsSocket?

[Mariano Martinez Peck via Glass]

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Richard Sargent via Glass <
glass at lists.gemtalksystems.com> wrote:

> GLASS mailing list wrote
> > I am trying to use GsHostProcess and provide a polling API for it.
> > Something like this:
> >
> >
> > ------
> >
> > runAndWaitPollingEvery: pollingMsPeriod onExitDo: anExitBlock
> >
> >   | process delay outStream errStream |
> >   delay := Delay forMilliseconds: pollingMsPeriod.
> >   outStream := WriteStream new.
> >   errStream := WriteStream new.
> >
> >   process := GsHostProcess fork: aCommandString.
> >
> >   [ process childHasExited ]
> >   whileFalse: [
> > delay wait.
> >                 "retrieve all we have in the pipes to make room and avoid
> > locks"
> > outStream nextPutAll: *process stdout upToEnd.*
> > errStream nextPutAll: *process stderr upToEnd.*
> > ].
> >
> >   outStream nextPutAll: *process stdout upToEnd.*
> >   errStream nextPutAll: *process stderr upToEnd.*
> >
> >   process stdout close.
> >   process stderr close.
> >
> >   aBlock cull: outStream contents cull: errStream contents
> >
> > --------
> >
> > I tried to implement an GsSocket >> upToEnd like this:
>
> Mariano, I like what you are trying to do. But, I think the name you have
> chosen is flawed.
>
> The fact that you had to write a comment where you used it to explain what
> you meant is a red flag for that. "retrieve all we have in the pipes" is
> quite different from the usual Stream implementation for #upToEnd. It
> sounds
> like you want to use a name more like #allAvailable. (Note that I don't
> think that's the best possible name, but I don't have a better one at this
> moment.)
>
>
Hi Richard,

Thanks, #allAvailable is indeed better. However, note that such a method
may be way too general to be put in GsSocket (I don't know). It might only
make sense when using pipes underneath? I don't know. Probably, I will add
it as a extension method with my app prefix (#fa) and call it
#faAllAvailableInPipe (or something to make clear it may only work for
pipes....if this is the case).

Aside from the selector, what do you think about the contents? does that
sound correct?

Thanks!



>
>
> > -----
> > upToEnd
> > | newStream buffer nextBytes |
> > buffer := buffer1 species new: 1000.
> > newStream := WriteStream on: (buffer1 species new: 100).
> > [self readWillNotBlock not or: [(nextBytes := self read: buffer size
> into:
> > buffer startingAt: 1) isEmpty]]
> > whileFalse: [newStream nextPutAll: nextBytes].
> > ^ newStream contents
> > -----
> >
> > Does that sound correct?
> >
> > Thanks a lot in advance,
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mariano
> > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Glass mailing list
>
> > Glass at .gemtalksystems
>
> > http://lists.gemtalksystems.com/mailman/listinfo/glass
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Is-
> there-a-upToEnd-kind-of-read-for-a-none-blocking-GsSocket-
> tp4953564p4953607.html
> Sent from the GLASS mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> Glass mailing list
> Glass at lists.gemtalksystems.com
> http://lists.gemtalksystems.com/mailman/listinfo/glass
>



-- 
Mariano
http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gemtalksystems.com/mailman/private/glass/attachments/20170705/a8b57dfd/attachment.html>