michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote:
No need to apologize, I'm just curious where you got your info from.
The implementation has been the same since day 1, which means your
statement puzzles me.
So instead of re-inventing the wheel, maybe have a closer look again
at the
standard IPC mechanisms.
I will do, but I do note that
http://lazarus-ccr.sourceforge.net/docs/rtl/ipc/index.html explicitly
says that "It works only on the linux operating system". Where's the
source- I can only see ./fpcsrc/rtl/unix/ipc.pp
I meant the SimpleIPC unit from the FCL:
http://lazarus-ccr.sourceforge.net/docs/fcl/simpleipc/index.html
Because I was exploring various unix-domain socket aspects including
mtu, where they're put, how to recover if an inactive one's already
there (e.g. gdb failure) and so on. And in particular I was exploring
naming issues that were being fouled up by things like Mozilla, trying
to find some balance between the name of the project (known at
compilation time) and the name of the executable after this sort of
thing had caused a lot of local hassle.
So I think you've done better having something that is portable and is
coded fairly elegantly, but I don't think that I've gratuitously
reinvented the wheel.
--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk
[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
