From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFECA7ED7A for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:45:45 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of romain.bardou@inria.fr) identity=pra; client-ip=87.98.173.103; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="romain.bardou@inria.fr"; x-sender="romain.bardou@inria.fr"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of romain.bardou@inria.fr) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=87.98.173.103; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="romain.bardou@inria.fr"; x-sender="romain.bardou@inria.fr"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mo5.mail-out.ovh.net) identity=helo; client-ip=87.98.173.103; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="romain.bardou@inria.fr"; x-sender="postmaster@mo5.mail-out.ovh.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApYBAPpPU1BXYq1nnGdsb2JhbABFhS0TR7YYAQEBAQEGDQkJFCeCIQEFDBcPAQVAARAJAhoCBRYLAgIJAwIBAgE3AQ0GDQEFAgKICQSoX5MFgSGJdIVWgRIDlWGGAo0H X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,423,1344204000"; d="scan'208";a="173232875" Received: from 5.mo5.mail-out.ovh.net (HELO mo5.mail-out.ovh.net) ([87.98.173.103]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 14 Sep 2012 17:45:45 +0200 Received: from mail30.ha.ovh.net (b6.ovh.net [213.186.33.56]) by mo5.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 04E1EFFAE0B for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:51:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from b0.ovh.net (HELO queueout) (213.186.33.50) by b0.ovh.net with SMTP; 14 Sep 2012 17:45:44 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO ?138.231.81.39?) (romain%bardou.fr@138.231.81.39) by ns0.ovh.net with SMTP; 14 Sep 2012 17:45:43 +0200 Message-ID: <5053515E.4080001@inria.fr> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:46:38 +0200 From: Romain Bardou User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.6esrpre) Gecko/20120817 Icedove/10.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsOpbWllIERpbWlubw==?= CC: Jerome Vouillon , caml-list@inria.fr X-Ovh-Mailout: 178.32.228.5 (mo5.mail-out.ovh.net) References: <505336D4.7010700@inria.fr> <20120914162717.0527b04b@arrakis> <20120914152125.GA18300@pps.jussieu.fr> <20120914173350.4867089e@arrakis> In-Reply-To: <20120914173350.4867089e@arrakis> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 5847642641984490104 X-Ovh-Remote: 138.231.81.39 () X-Ovh-Local: 213.186.33.20 (ns0.ovh.net) X-OVH-SPAMSTATE: OK X-OVH-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-OVH-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeehtddrieeiucetufdoteggodetrfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfqggfjnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfhrhhomheptfhomhgrihhnuceurghrughouhcuoehrohhmrghinhdrsggrrhguohhusehinhhrihgrrdhfrheqnecujfgurhepkfffhfgfggfvufhfjggtgfesthekrgdttdefje X-Spam-Check: DONE|U 0.500007/N X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeehtddrieeiucetufdoteggodetrfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfqggfjnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfhrhhomheptfhomhgrihhnuceurghrughouhcuoehrohhmrghinhdrsggrrhguohhusehinhhrihgrrdhfrheqnecujfgurhepkfffhfgfggfvufhfjggtgfesthekrgdttdefje X-Validation-by: romain.bardou@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Unix.connect for non-blocking sockets on Windows Le 14/09/2012 17:33, Jérémie Dimino a écrit : > Le Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:21:25 +0200, > Jerome Vouillon a écrit : > >> You should use Unix.getsockopt_error (just like under Unix) to check >> for errors when the socket becomes writable, rather than call connect >> again. > > Acutally, last time i tried (on Windows XP) it was not working, > Unix.getsockopt_error was returning None but the socket was not > connected. > I just tried it (on Windows XP) and it works. But the connection is very slow for some reason, with about 30s between each message. I probably have to flush the socket or something. Cheers, -- Romain