| |||||||||||||
forkforkPosted Oct 3, 2012 12:16 UTC (Wed) by ballombe (subscriber, #9523)In reply to: fork by quotemstr Parent article: An Interview with Brian Kernighan (InformIT)
The parent has no GUI. It produces a set of data for the child. The fork causes the child to get a snapshot of the data. The child displays the data graphically. If the child were to exec() it would lose the data snapshot.
But my point is while there are various UNIX emulation layer available for windows, even one form MS which is POSIX certified, this does not make Windows a UNIX platform. The situation is increasingly similar on OS X.
(Log in to post comments)
fork Posted Oct 3, 2012 17:47 UTC (Wed) by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331) [Link]
> The fork causes the child to get a snapshot of the data. The child displays the data graphically.
Shared memory.
> this does not make Windows a UNIX platform. The situation is increasingly similar on OS X.
Nobody cares about an OS being a "UNIX platform". People care about an OS being able to run useful software. Forking in a GUI program and doing GUI things in the child *just ain't useful*.
fork Posted Oct 3, 2012 20:37 UTC (Wed) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link] ...Shared memory. What part of "snapshot" is unclear?
fork Posted Oct 4, 2012 15:28 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
Wouldn't MAP_PRIVATE work for that? (curious, I've never tried)
fork Posted Oct 4, 2012 19:23 UTC (Thu) by quotemstr (subscriber, #45331) [Link]
MAP_PRIVATE only works once. You can't use it to create multiple versioned snapshots.
fork Posted Oct 4, 2012 0:41 UTC (Thu) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link] I'm presuming the amount of data involved would be unreasonable to pass over a pipe.
fork Posted Oct 4, 2012 15:32 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
Or that it doesn't serialize well, like trees or video processing data.
|
|||||||||||||