Re: Buffered reading of stream files

You realize that if you use fread(), all the buffering is handled invisibly for you? You just read however many bytes you want at any one time.

That *is* the advantage of using fread(), fwrite(), fopen() etc.

-Paul
?

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Glauser [mailto:adamglauser@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, February 5, 2009 07:44 AM
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Buffered reading of stream files

Simon, you are correct that I am currently using the open(), read() and close() Unix APIs.Simon Coulter wrote:> Whether you do your own buffering or use the OS buffering you'll still > have to deal with incomplete data where you have part of the desired > data in the buffer but the buffer is full. Dealing with this situation > may be easier when you control the buffering.That's a good point, which I realized on the drive home last night. I think I came up with a reasonable solution using fread() which will be simpler than handling all of the buffering. I'm planning to put together a prototype and compare with my existing routine today.-- This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i (RPG400-L) mailing listTo post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-lor email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx posting, please take a moment to review the archivesat http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.