Re: close() vs. closesocket()

From: pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com
To: pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us
Cc: pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: close() vs. closesocket()
Date: 2003-04-25 16:26:54
Message-ID: 1030.68.162.220.216.1051288014.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

> pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com wrote:
>> >
>> > We have never been into abstraction for the sake of abstraction.
>>
>> Would you say that is a *good* thing or a *bad* thing?
>
> A good thing --- too much abstraction is bad --- look at Mozilla for a
> chilling example.
>
Anyone can find a *bad* example of something good. I did justify my
statement with a "reasonable" cause.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message pgsql 2003-04-25 16:59:13 Re: close() vs. closesocket()
Previous Message pgsql 2003-04-25 16:17:22 Re: close() vs. closesocket()

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message pgsql 2003-04-25 16:59:13 Re: close() vs. closesocket()
Previous Message pgsql 2003-04-25 16:17:22 Re: close() vs. closesocket()