John,
I was thinking about this last night. I think we can handle all forked calls
in the same way. All we have to do is pass the class a boost::function to be
executed after the fork instead of the current string that is then passed to
the system() function.
Ie, we'd have a class
class ForkedFunction {
int startfunction(Starttype, boost::function const & func);
};
and the current
class Forkedcall {
int startscript(Starttype, string const & what);
};
whould just be a wrapper to ForkedFunction, passing
boost::function(system, what)
to startfunction.
Forkedcontrl then becomes a controller of ForkedFunctions.
All that shit in the Ispell c-tor after the fork() call wouldl then be
wrapped in a separate function that could also be passed to ForkedFunction.
Voilà! A single interface to fork() or spawnvp() on cygwin etc.
What do the experts think? Is the concept sound?
Angus
ps Incidentally, it looks to me like "the Pipestream class that André posted
to the list" is custom-made for ispell too.
A.
