Tcl Source Code

Stealing TclX's [pipe] as [chan pipe].
Only changes: (1) naming more in line with surrounding style, and (2) creation of a true list instead of a string (robustness against spaces in channel names).

IP - Comment Removed: 130.88.1.31

data_type - 210894

Logged In: YES 
user_id=496139
Originator: YES

Committed to HEAD after a bit of whitespace police :-)

File Added - 283915: chanpipe6.patch

Logged In: YES 
user_id=496139
Originator: YES

File Added: chanpipe6.patch

Logged In: YES 
user_id=496139
Originator: YES

Last upload deprecates [chan pipe pr pw] following discussion on tcl-core.

File Deleted - 281438: 



File Added - 283429: chanpipe5.patch

Logged In: YES 
user_id=496139
Originator: YES

File Added: chanpipe5.patch

File Deleted - 281158:

File Added - 281438: chanpipe4.patch

Logged In: YES 
user_id=496139
Originator: YES

Changed CONST84 to const following Joe's advice.
File Added: chanpipe4.patch

File Deleted - 281060: 



File Added - 281158: chanpipe4.patch

Logged In: YES 
user_id=496139
Originator: YES

OK, Donal agrees with you so I renamed it Tcl_CreatePipe ;-)
Would you vote YES now ?
File Added: chanpipe4.patch

Logged In: YES 
user_id=72656
Originator: NO

_I_ would be, which is to say I'm comfortable with Tcl_CreatePipe being the correct, formal, public API that we expect users to use.  This might be worth running by tcl-core though.

Logged In: YES 
user_id=496139
Originator: YES

So if I rename it, and hence we get side-by-side TclpCreatePipe (returning two TclFile's) and Tcl_CreatePipe (returning two Tcl_Channel's),  you're happy ?

Logged In: YES 
user_id=72656
Originator: NO

If we are never going to promote TclpCreatePipe, then I don't think we should hamper the long term API with a lesser name (Tcl_StandalonePipe).  This about the now, as well as the later.

File Deleted - 281049: 



File Added - 281060: chanpipe3.patch

Logged In: YES 
user_id=496139
Originator: YES

OK for the flags. New impl attached.
For the name, I prefer to stay visually far from the existing TclpCreatePipe, which has similar semantics but uses a different type for channel encapsulation. More generally, the whole code is sprinkled with the confusion between a "pipe" and a "pipeline" (which is made of several children processes and pipes), and I think the word "standalone" helps keep things clear ;-)
 
File Added: chanpipe3.patch

Logged In: YES 
user_id=72656
Originator: NO

I would strongly urge a flags arg to Tcl_StandalonePipe (and is there a better name for that ... like Tcl_CreatePipe?).  It may not be used immediately, but it will improve the chances that anything forgotten is easier to slot in.  I'm having this issue now with shoe-horning inet6 in to old APIs that really should use flags.

File Added - 281049: chanpipe2.patch

Logged In: YES 
user_id=496139
Originator: YES

Attached the improved implementation:
 - public API (stub slot 580 in tcl)
 - clearer signature (two explicit channel args instead of an array)
 - test suite
 - doc (chan.n)
File Added: chanpipe2.patch

File Added - 279530: chanpipe.patch