Ian Timms wrote in a message to Jerry McBride:

 IT> {at}MSGID: 3:633/379.0 2f5af274
 IT> On the 02-28-95, Jerry Mcbride was chatting with Mike
 IT> Stella: 

 IT> [deletia]

JM>No. I was hoping to drop the "dos way of doing things" and 
JM>use os2 comhandles instead of dos comports. As delivered, 
JM>rxasync uses a comport number to open and close the serial 
JM>ports. It'd be better, at least to me, to use handles, like 
JM>the rest of os2 does.

 IT> Actually, "as delivered", RxAsync lets you do it
both ways! 

Ian! Great to hear form you! Did you receive my netmail messages??? I've
sent a few routed and I've called the bbs you habitate and left some there
also.

This is great news. It's something that I hadn't tried as it's not
something that most programmers provide for. I'll try it later on...

Thanks!

 IT> If you don't have an open com port handle then use RxAsyncOpen 
 IT> to get it.

 IT> If you already have an open com port handle then just pass
 IT> it it into the calls eg. RxAsyncRead etc, it'll be accepted,
 IT> no need to do the open, no problems, no questions asked, no
 IT> quarter given!

Great! This is what I wanted to do!

 IT> The only proviso with the 'direct' method is that the beast you 
 IT> got the handle from better have opened it as 
 IT> READWRITE_DENYNONE!!! (simplisticly speaking.)

Hmmm... what happens if the passing routined fails to pass the handle off
in readwrite_denynone?


Jerry McBride 
--- timEd/2 1.01+