From: Christopher Kohlhoff (chris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-20 19:07:53
--- Dave Gomboc <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> The devil's advocate position remains: synchronous operation is
> merely the
> particular case where the handling policy prevents the function from
> returning control to the caller until the operation has completed; no
> unique function signature is warranted.
I'm a little confused about what you mean :) They seem like
fundamentally different operations to me.
At the moment, the handler doesn't get used until after the operation
completes, so it can't prevent the function from returning control (or
do anything else).
Also how do you deal with return values in this case (my earlier
statement of the similarity of forgot about them, there is a systematic
mapping but it's got more rules to it than that it seems -- something I
ought to add to the documentation!). E.g. the number of bytes
transferred is the return value of the synchronous send, but is passed
to the handler in the asynchronous case.