Article View: comp.std.unix
Article #59Re: Another file handles question/comment
From: Doug Gwyn
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1989 05:02
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1989 05:02
19 lines
1442 bytes
1442 bytes
From: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) In article <378@longway.TIC.COM> barry@PRC.Unisys.COM (Barry Traylor) writes: >Within my development group there has been some debate about the file handle >issue. I believed the onus was on the implementation, but was convinced by >associates, more imbued with the Unix tradition than myself, that that >was not the case, that the onus was on the application. Your associates are correct (as I interpret IEE Std 1003.1-1988). The stuff about file handles is intended to allow the implementation to NOT have to synchronize file descriptors with stdio streams and vice-versa. It is up to the application to take steps to assure such synchronization when switching back and forth between multiple handles on the same underlying open file description. The intention is NOT to force extensive use of semaphores in the library, quite the opposite. Volume-Number: Volume 17, Number 10
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<379@longway.TIC.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!ames!apple!longway!std-unixReferences:
<378@longway.TIC.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!ames!apple!longway!std-unix From: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) Newsgroups: comp.std.unix Subject: Re: Another file handles question/comment Message-ID: <379@longway.TIC.COM> Date: 28 Aug 89 05:02:45 GMT References: <378@longway.TIC.COM> Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. Lines: 19 Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)