< :前の番号
^ :番号順リスト
> :次の番号
P :前の記事
N :次の記事（スレッド移動）
|<:スレッドの先頭
>|:次のスレッド
^ :返事先
_:自分への返事
>:同じ返事先を持つ記事（前）
<:同じ返事先を持つ記事（後）
---:分割してスレッド表示、再表示
| :分割して（縦）スレッド表示、再表示
~ :スレッドのフレーム消去
.:インデックス
..:インデックスのインデックス
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 03:55:16AM +0900, Eric Wong wrote:
> Aaron Patterson <tenderlove / ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> > It occurs to me that this is pretty similar to IO#readpartial. The main
> > difference being that readpartial automatically retries on EWOULDBLOCK
> > and raises an EOF error. Maybe there should be a `try_readpartial` in
> > addition to the proposed `try_read_nonblock`?
>
> It's always bothered me that IO#readpartial raises EOFError, too
> (especially when IO#read returns nil). So yes, try_readpartial
> would be good, but try_*nonblock is much more important since
> EAGAIN is more common than EOF.
Ah, I was thinking that IO#try_readpartial would work exactly the same as
try_*nonblock, but with a buffer (no exceptions, no automatic retry).
> Also, I also wonder if there's a generic way for us to implement
> "expected exceptions":
>
> - without needing to introduce additional methods
> - without allocating new objects for common exceptions
>
> Perhaps similar to catch/throw...
>
> Maybe:
>
> begin_expect(Errno::ENOENT)
> # cause the _class_ Errno::ENOENT to be raised,
> # not an instance of Errno::ENOENT
> File.open("/possibly/non-existent/file")
> rescue Errno::ENOENT => e
> e == Errno::ENOENT # note the '==' (not '===')
> end
>
> Otherwise, we might end up needing try_open, try_stat, try_lstat,
> try_link, try_unlink, try_rename, etc to avoid racy/wasteful
> File.exist? calls...
I'm not sure. The big thing for me about the try_* methods is that I
can use `loop` as the looping construct, not rescue / retry.
--
Aaron Patterson
http://tenderlovemaking.com/