Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3E2FF0E4.3B0A5093@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:40:52 +0000
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.23 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: readv, writev [PATCH]
References: <200301231050 DOT LAA05851 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Martin Stromberg wrote:
> 
> > Say you write the first part of the data, but then the write for the next
> > part fails. What do you return? The call has failed, but you have written
> > some
> 
> No. It succeeded in writing the first part. You return the value of as
> many bytes you've written. (Just as write would do if it partially
> wrote something.)

If write partially writes something, it doesn't fail.

If the second write fails, how do you know how much data it has written? I
think you're saying: does it matter? I may be worrying too much, since code
should be written to cope with read/write not returning as much as was asked
to read/write.

I'm concerned about pipes. I'm not sure why - it's just a gut feeling.

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]