this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
847 points (99.4% liked)

Programmer Humor

32039 readers
1467 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 51 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Note that this isn't specific to Go. Reading from stream-like data, be it TCP connections, files or whatever always comes with the risk that not all data is present in the local buffer yet. The vast majority of read operations returns the number of bytes that could be read and you should call them in a loop. Same of write operations actually, if you're writing to a stream-like object as the write buffers may be smaller than what you're trying to write.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I’ve run into the same problem with an API server I wrote in rust. I noticed this bug 5 minutes before a demo and panicked, but fixed it with a 1 second sleep. Eventually, I implemented a more permanent fix by changing the simplistic io calls to ones better designed for streams

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago

The actual recommended solution is to just read in a loop until you have everything.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Ah yes... several years ago now I was working on a tool called Toxiproxy that (among other things) could slice up the stream chunks into many random small pieces before forwarding them along. It turned out to be very useful for testing applications for this kind of bug.