[ViewVC] Diff of: cvs/libev/ev.pod

Comparing libev/ev.pod (file contents):
Revision 1.396 by root, Sat Feb 4 17:57:55 2012 UTC vs.
Revision 1.398 by root, Mon Apr 2 18:39:54 2012 UTC

 It scales in the same way as the epoll backend, but the interface to the
 kernel is more efficient (which says nothing about its actual speed, of
 course). While stopping, setting and starting an I/O watcher does never
 cause an extra system call as with C<EVBACKEND_EPOLL>, it still adds up to
-two event changes per incident. Support for C<fork ()> is very bad (but
+two event changes per incident. Support for C<fork ()> is very bad (you
-sane, unlike epoll) and it drops fds silently in similarly hard-to-detect
+might have to leak fd's on fork, but it's more sane than epoll) and it
-cases
+drops fds silently in similarly hard-to-detect cases
 This backend usually performs well under most conditions.
 While nominally embeddable in other event loops, this doesn't work
 everywhere, so you might need to test for this. And since it is broken
 with C<operator ()> can be used as callbacks. Other types should be easy
 to add as long as they only need one additional pointer for context. If
 you need support for other types of functors please contact the author
 (preferably after implementing it).
+For all this to work, your C++ compiler either has to use the same calling
+conventions as your C compiler (for static member functions), or you have
+to embed libev and compile libev itself as C++.
 Here is a list of things available in the C<ev> namespace:
 =over 4
 =item C<ev::READ>, C<ev::WRITE> etc.

-–
+Removed lines
-+
+Added lines
-<
+Changed lines
->
+Changed lines