I think that executing commands falls into the 'slow' category and thus should not take place in a record processing thread. The asynOctet approach provides a simple mechanism for handling the command in a worker thread.
On Feb 21, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Ralph Lange wrote:
> On 21.02.2011 18:45 Eric Norum wrote:
>> I wrote a simply asynOctet driver to do this. I've not yet packaged this up for official release until I hear back from the folks testing this.
>> I'm not 100% sure that it's a good idea to allow commands to be run as the result of record processing, but maybe there's a real need out there.
>
> Any subroutine record can execute commands in the context of record processing. Where's the big difference?
>
> ~Ralph
>
--
Eric Norum
[email protected]
- References:
- [Fwd: Re: stream without asynPort] Dirk Zimoch
- Re: [Fwd: Re: stream without asynPort] Eric Norum
- Re: [Fwd: Re: stream without asynPort] Ralph Lange
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: [Fwd: Re: stream without asynPort] Ralph Lange
- Next:
Re: [Fwd: Re: stream without asynPort] Andrew Johnson
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
<2011>
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: [Fwd: Re: stream without asynPort] Ralph Lange
- Next:
Re: [Fwd: Re: stream without asynPort] Andrew Johnson
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
<2011>
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|