home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: Jason Zions <jason@cnd.hp.com>
-
- Regarding the Snitch Editor's fine report, in the section discussing
- 1003.12 comes the following sentence:
-
- > Our snitch, Andy Nicholson, challenged readers to find a reason not to
- > make DNI endpoints POSIX file descriptors, but has seen no takers.
-
- How about because it constrains implementations to make DNI
- kernel-resident?
-
- How about because the semantics of operations permitted on POSIX file
- descriptors are a poor match for many transport providers? Read()/write()
- are stream operations; only TCP is a stream transport provider. OSI TP0/2/4
- maps much more closely to stdio and fgets()/fputs() in that it is
- record-oriented. What does it mean to seek() on a network endpoint?
-
- A significant branch of the UNIX(tm)-system and POSIX research community
- believes "All the world's a file"; the Research Unix V.8 and Plan 9 folks
- are among the leaders here. I feel only slightly squeemish about accusing
- them of having only a hammer in their toolbelt; of *course* everything
- looks like a nail!
-
- I think it would probably be acceptable to have a DNI function which
- accepted a DNI endpoint as argument and attempted to return a real file
- descriptor. This function would check to see that the underlying transport
- provider could present reasonable semantics through a POSIX file
- descriptor, and would also check that the implementation supported access
- to that transport provider through a kernel interface.
-
- Jason Zions
-
- * UNIX is a trademark of AT&T in the US and other countries.
- ** Obstreperous iconoclast is a behavioral trademark of Jason Zions in the
- US and other countries.
-
- Volume-Number: Volume 20, Number 85
-
-