No, I don't feel like implementing such a check, I feel like unimplementing masts check. I think the usefulness of read callbacks on blocking fds outweighs the "potential danger" (which is rather limited).
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
Previous text:
2003-03-19 15:52: Subject: I/O callbacks in blocking mode
The point of the interface the backend/callback stuff is that it shouldn't block on waiting for _i/o_ on one fd while there's i/o possible on other fd:s. The point is to coordinate the i/o blocking for all fd:s. And perhaps signals (although it would be nicer if it didn't have to do that). No more, no less.
When possible, it should be robust to stupidity outside of the process itself (such as stdin being shared with other processes). That you can do arbitrarily stupid things *within* a particular callback function for a particular file is not relevant for the backend machinery.
I think this discussion is getting stupid. Sure, If you feel like implementing a check that emits some kind of warning if sleep is called inside a read callback, go ahead, I'll probably not object, but that is a different issue.
/ Niels Möller ()