Re^2: Handling sockets in a server

Not to deviate too much from the questions in this post, so you can close a filehandle and you are able to check a return value from the close? I'm sorry I haven't seen this done. I do check success/failure on closing pipes and the man page link you included talks about pipes returning a failure if one of the system calls failed. So, I believe my statement is acurate about no failure returned on a file handle.

Hopefully, someone can help with the meat of this post.

Thanks,

Shannon Kerr

Comment on Re^2: Handling sockets in a server

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Socket by tbone1 (Monsignor) on Oct 21, 2005 at 13:18 UTC
Not to deviate too much from the questions in this post, so you can close a filehandle and you are able to check a return value from the close? "I'll go further than that, I'll get off at the depot." () You can use the syntax: `close FILEHANDLE or die "Could not close FILEHANDLE: $!\n";` [download] to tell you what the errno* varaible was set to when FILEHANDLE could not be closed. -- (*) - This quote stolen with great embarrassment from Groucho Marx. -- tbone1, YAPS (Yet Another Perl Schlub) And remember, if he succeeds, so what. - Chick McGee	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Handling sockets in a server by skerr1 (Sexton) on Oct 21, 2005 at 14:55 UTC
Geez, now you sucked me in. Can you demonstrate a block of code that this works with. I've written several tools that tried to check the return on a close filehandle and never have I seen an error. I would like to see a true failure. And if someone would like to answer the orginal questions of the post, I would like that too! :) Thanks! Shannon Kerr	[reply]
Re^3: Socket by blazar (Canon) on Oct 21, 2005 at 13:16 UTC
I have seen someone do, instead. But indeed I've always considered it to be overly paranoid. The point being that a close on a regular filehandle may well fail, but we're confident that it will happen rarely enough no to go mad about it...	[reply]