Subject: Re: [libssh2] non-blocking status

Re: [libssh2] non-blocking status

From: Daniel Stenberg <>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 13:39:29 +0100 (CET)

On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Simon Josefsson wrote:

> You could write a non-blocking version of those functions and calling
> them:
> int libssh2_async_sftp_init(..., LIBSSH2_SFTP **sftp)
> int libssh2_async_sftp_open(..., LIBSSH2_SFTP_HANDLE *sftph)


> Of course, change the names to something more appropriate if you want.
> Perhaps 'libssh2_sftp_init_nb' and 'libssh2_sftp_open_nb' etc?

Hm, right. That would of course be possible, although it would almost double
the number of public functions in the library. Perhaps the benefit of not
breaking the existing API outweights the drawbacks.

Having this concept it would also possibly be easier to mix what kind of
behaviour you want in your application, like you can do the init and open in a
blocking manner but do the transfer phase non-blocking etc.

I think I like this idea. It would also make it clearly which functions that
would work non-blocking since we'd only implement those that truly are...

Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
libssh2-devel mailing list
Received on 2007-01-26