Bryan Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think I see what you're doing, but fork() after step 1 will > create a child process with the same memory allocated. > > I think it would make more sense to do step 1 in a subprocess. > Use the subprocess module or one of the older popen()s to create > a process that builds the target object, pickles it and pipes > it back to the main process, then exits.
Sorry, yes, that's what I meant. I shouldn't have used the word fork without further qualification, which specifically means the child process has all the same data. What's needed would traditionally have been done by a fork followed by an exec, and popen would have done something like that. These days I think there's some more streamlined ways to do it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
