Re: open socket with listen() and still have command line available?

[John Swensen]

David Bateman wrote:
> Przemek Klosowski wrote:
>   
> >    from reading several of your posts on the listen function it seems that you
> >    are kind of fixated on your TCL stuff. Because there are many more uses of
> >    octave besides embedding in TCL, your short answer could have been "you are
> >    right, listen is useless unless you want to have reduced octave
> >    functionality".
> >
> > No, Paul's listen is very useful apart from TCL; I used it this way
> > myself. The point is that octave command loop is not set to accept
> > multiple input streams, and TCL always had this capability, so if you
> > want to be able to accept commands from a network socket and, say,
> > commandline at the same time, TCL gives the easiest way to implement
> > it. This was the original question, so Paul brougt up TCL. Best tool
> > for the job, and all that.
> > _______________________________________________
> >   
> >     
> As I'm currently thinking about octave-forge packaging and a release, I
> see that both the package sockets and miscellaneous (which contains
> Paul's listen function) are marked as autoloaded by default.
>
> As there is an overlap in functionality, this makes no sense as which
> version of listen that will be used will be determined by the order
> Octave saves the package description structure to a file. There is no
> guarantee of any particular order for this.
>
> I'd therefore propose that the sockets package is not marked as
> autoloaded and then when a user wants this functionality they force
> sockets to be loaded with "pkg load sockets".. This will ensure that
>
> D.
>
>   
That is fine with me.  Until I get the functions renamed to sock_* and 
implement a higher level set of functions, I see no reason why you 
shouldn't make it a manual-load package.

John Swensen