China Blue Veins
7/8/2011 3:30:00 PM
In article <slrnj1e553.21o0.usenet-nospam@guild.seebs.net>,
Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> wrote:
> In general, C implementations will do a reasonable job of implementing
> fopen()
> sensibly.
That would explain why so many people have replaced it.
> The major advantage of tty buffering is efficiency over connections where
> latency is relatively high. Such as, say, any remote connection whatsoever.
> If you've got access to machines which support both character and line
> buffering, and aren't physically adjacent, try it out sometime; line
And how often do people use a remote connection any more? An xterm is not a
remote connection. Most people now use desktop, laptops, and workstations. They
are rarely using telnet, ftp, etc directly.
> fopen makes sense for plain files. Arguing that it's possible that the
> buffer
> will get paged is... well, frankly, totally irrelevant. The parts of the
> system that do buffering are usually aware of those tradeoffs.
I hate to break to you, but stdio is increasingly the interface of last resort.
--
I remember finding out about you, |A free Thai dyed shirt in every box.
Everyday my mind is all around you,| I'm whoever you want me to be.
Looking out from my lonely room | Annoying Usenet one post at a time.
Day after day. | At least I can stay in character.