On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:09 PM Manlio Perillo <manlio.peri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at 12:06:15 AM UTC+2, Manlio Perillo wrote: >> >> On Tuesday, August 21, 2018 at 9:50:23 AM UTC+2, Caleb Spare wrote: >>> >>> > > [...] > > >> >>> >> Here are two potential problems that I considered: >>> >>> 1. Is exec-without-fork fundamentally at odds with Go and its runtime >>> somehow, like fork-without-exec is? I don't see why that would be the case. >>> >> >> fork without exec simply does not work with multithreading programs: >> https://thorstenball.com/blog/2014/10/13/why-threads-cant-fork/ >> >> Also, fork is not supported on Windows (well, AFAIK it can be implemented >> but it is an hack). >> >> 2. Is the concept of exec-without-fork incoherent on non-Posix systems? I >>> mainly worry about Windows; after some brief googling it did seem like you >>> can exec on Windows, though I admit the situation isn't at all clear to me. >>> >>> >> exec is not supported on Windows. >> >> > > For low level UNIX specific API, see syscall.Exec. > Yes, I'm using syscall.Exec (actually, unix.Exec) already. My question was about avoiding all the awful syscall boilerplate that os.StartProcess (really, syscall.StartProcess) takes care of. > > > [...] > > Manlio > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
