00:37:15  * cremesjoined
01:54:07  * PerilousApricotjoined
02:17:14  * PerilousApricotquit (Remote host closed the connection)
02:31:13  * PerilousApricotjoined
02:51:59  * xuejoined
03:02:42  * PerilousApricotquit (Remote host closed the connection)
05:09:07  * PerilousApricotjoined
05:14:03  * PerilousApricotquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
05:21:22  * rgrinbergquit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
06:10:51  * thefourtheyejoined
06:11:01  * addaleaxjoined
06:38:15  * seishunjoined
06:39:37  * PerilousApricotjoined
06:43:58  * PerilousApricotquit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
07:30:01  * seishunquit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
07:40:40  * PerilousApricotjoined
07:45:30  * PerilousApricotquit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
08:32:52  * roxlupart
08:42:12  * PerilousApricotjoined
08:46:40  * PerilousApricotquit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
08:57:15  * saghul_joined
09:00:43  * rendarjoined
09:37:40  * davijoined
09:37:40  * daviquit (Changing host)
09:37:40  * davijoined
09:50:14  * addaleaxquit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
09:50:44  * addaleaxjoined
10:34:04  * thealphanerdquit (Quit: farewell for now)
10:34:35  * thealphanerdjoined
10:44:24  * PerilousApricotjoined
10:51:26  * PerilousApricotquit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
11:09:57  * daviquit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
11:12:47  * davijoined
12:07:30  * jBarzjoined
12:08:25  * piscisaureusjoined
12:08:31  * piscisaureusquit (Client Quit)
12:12:46  * daviquit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
12:21:42  * davijoined
12:26:34  * daviquit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
12:43:06  * PerilousApricotjoined
13:12:53  * rgrinbergjoined
14:43:18  * skypjackjoined
14:43:44  <skypjack>hello, I've a question about uv_fs_read
14:44:11  <skypjack>it accepts a bunch of uv_buf_t structures as an argument
14:44:37  <skypjack>I don't understand if and how I should initialize the base field on them
14:44:46  <skypjack>I don't understand if and how I should initialize the base field for them in this case
14:45:28  <skypjack>on the other side, if it is hasn't to be initialized, I guess uv will fill it and the question becomes: is the caller in charge of freeing it?
14:47:55  <skypjack>unfortunately, the documentation (http://docs.libuv.org/en/v1.x/fs.html#c.uv_fs_read) doesn't help in this case... :-(
14:54:01  <saghul_>hey
14:54:12  <saghul_>you need to allocate the space for the base
14:54:27  <saghul_>libuv will copy the uv_buf_t structures, but not their content
14:54:39  <saghul_>so it's up to you to allocate it, and up to you to free it
14:54:48  <saghul_>libuv won't allocate it for you.
14:54:53  <saghul_>skypjack ^^
14:54:58  <skypjack>it makes sense indeed :-)
14:55:25  <skypjack>thank you very much, even in an example online it wasn't allocating the base buffer
14:55:40  <skypjack>so it was a bit misleading
14:55:57  <saghul_>what example?
14:56:05  <skypjack>uhm... let me find the link
14:56:23  <skypjack>non-official one, anyway
14:56:39  <skypjack>here: https://nikhilm.github.io/uvbook/filesystem.html
14:56:57  <skypjack>he calls uv_buf_init, then uv_fs_read and that's all
14:57:26  <skypjack>ok, stop
14:57:29  <skypjack>it's fine :-D
14:57:30  <saghul_>that's correct
14:57:35  <skypjack>I'm tired, I'm sorry,
14:57:42  <saghul_>as long as "buffer" was allocated on the heap
14:57:49  <saghul_>np!
14:57:50  <skypjack>my first baby is making me crazy because of the lack of sleep
14:58:11  <skypjack>ok, right, got it, at least I've understood how to proceed
14:58:20  <skypjack>thank you very much
14:58:20  <saghul_>glad I helped
14:58:46  <skypjack>really appreciated
15:10:30  <skypjack>thank you again, bye bye
15:10:43  * skypjackquit (Quit: Page closed)
15:32:08  * skypjackjoined
15:33:16  <skypjack>hello, for you had been kind to me with the previous question, I'd venture with the next one
15:33:38  <skypjack>just curious, it's about requests
15:35:20  <skypjack>I've read that handles are meant for long running operations and their lifetimes start with an init and end with a close (more or less at least)
15:35:38  <skypjack>on the other side, requests are meant for short operations
15:36:50  <skypjack>can I reuse them once the callbacks are called? I mean, as an example for a uv_work_t, can I reuse it after the invokation of uv_after_work_cb or should I discard it?
15:38:30  <skypjack>the same applies to uv_fs_t: can I use a single structure for multiple requests before to call uv_fs_req_cleanup or should I create a new uv_fs_t for each request?
15:39:27  <skypjack>in a C++ wrapper, it would help reusing the same underlying structure (unless the outer object is destroyed, of course)
15:43:35  <skypjack>(one after the other, I don't want to start multiple requests at the same time, of course!!)
15:51:27  <skypjack>unfortunately I've to leave, I'll be back with the same question tomorrow!! :-)
15:51:32  <skypjack>thank you anyway
15:51:35  * skypjackquit (Quit: Page closed)
15:59:20  * jason_zhangjoined
15:59:56  * jason_zhangquit (Client Quit)
16:09:03  * seishunjoined
16:12:51  * PerilousApricotquit (Remote host closed the connection)
16:21:35  * PerilousApricotjoined
16:23:28  * dap_joined
16:38:46  * davijoined
16:38:54  * daviquit (Changing host)
16:38:54  * davijoined
16:39:10  * Jacob843quit (Quit: Leaving)
16:39:48  * Jacob843joined
16:40:20  * saghul_quit (Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
16:40:48  * seishunquit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
16:43:30  * seishunjoined
17:15:15  * rgrinbergquit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
17:24:26  * daviquit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
17:28:19  * a3fjoined
17:33:35  * a3fquit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
17:42:21  * rgrinbergjoined
17:42:39  * brsonjoined
17:43:44  * rgrinbergquit (Client Quit)
17:44:19  * rgrinbergjoined
18:01:12  * PerilousApricotquit (Remote host closed the connection)
18:21:23  * PerilousApricotjoined
18:25:54  * PerilousApricotquit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
18:26:57  * PerilousApricotjoined
18:43:14  * saghul_joined
18:59:13  * tunniclm_joined
19:11:54  * qard-appnetajoined
19:38:11  * rendarquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
19:46:17  * seishunquit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
20:07:52  * rendarjoined
20:18:25  * rgrinbergquit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
20:38:46  <jBarz>@saghul: Regarding PR 937 (enable zos), would it be preferable if I split that into multiple PRs?
20:44:09  * rgrinbergjoined
20:47:04  * seishunjoined
21:45:07  * seishunquit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
21:54:50  * jBarzquit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
22:12:02  * JBarzjoined
22:16:30  * JBarzquit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
22:25:53  * rendarquit (Quit: std::lower_bound + std::less_equal *works* with a vector without duplicates!)
22:28:18  * saghul_quit (Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
22:58:09  * dap_quit (Quit: Leaving.)
23:02:04  * addaleaxquit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)