Re: [Axiom-developer] Sockets and threads

[gdr]

Quoting Waldek Hebisch <address@hidden>:

> Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> > C Y <address@hidden> writes:
> > | One question - as I understand it, AXIOMsys works on Windows but the
> > | parent program axiom does not.  Would a HyperDoc for Windows also
> > | require a new communications mechanism?  Doing this straight from lisp
> > | (ala hunchentoot or something similar) would be my preference, but
> > | again it's probably not simple.
> >
> > I see no fundamental reason why both process should not be threads in
> > the same problem and therefore bypass the socket stuff.  From my
> > perspective, that is just another over-engineering aspect of Axiom.
> > Notice that if you use sockets, the the anti-virus firewall will
> > consider Axiom as a program that wants access to network and it might
> > be blocked; then the anti-virus will ask you whether you want to grant
> > access or not.  That is silly.
>
> There is a good reason to run other processes in separate address
> space: Lisp garbage collector.

Yes, if the collector is designed to be uncoperative -- yes.
But "garbage collector" in itself is not a reason.
If you take the flash media player for example, it has
a garbage collector, but is does run in environment that do use
expect garbage collection. Many other projects do the same.

Be liberal in what you accept and conservative in what you deliver.
That was known engineering principle decades ago.

For some reasons, I've been exposed to all the intricate details
of garbage collector I did not want to know -- and some I wanted to
know, because we are considering Programmer Controlled Garbage
Collection for C++ and we have to solve issues related to
combining component that can leave with GC, those that prohibit it,
and those that require it.

In the FRISCO projects, we had components that were GC'd and some that
aren't.

> This places significant restrictions
> on possible interface between C and Lisp.

Not that much.

-- Gaby