[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

constructor daemon vs. constructor library

From: Neal H. Walfield
Subject: constructor daemon vs. constructor library
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:29:54 +0100
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.10.1 (Watching The Wheels) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.6 (Marutamachi) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.4 (i386-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)

At Mon, 15 Jan 2007 12:00:48 -0500,
Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 09:42 +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > At Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:21:38 -0500,
> > "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > Libraries are a tool that you should only reach for when the performance
> > > cost of engineerability becomes prohibitive.
> > 
> > You are conflating separate issues.  If you want address space
> > separation, then there is no reason why the C library can not spawn
> > arbitrary helper processes to execute the algorithms desired by the
> > user.  I leave open the question for now if this makes sense in this
> > case or not.
> Sigh.
> Marcus: when people speak of implementing libraries they generally mean
> that the algorithm runs in the same address space. It is you who are
> conflating issues here.

You need code to call the daemon which presumably is in a library.
Why is that so much simpler than spawning a new process which performs
the same function?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]