On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:30 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> A sandbox can be relatively expensive, but it should definitely be
> much cheaper than a new process.
>
In terms of time, I guess so, but in terms of memory, since the old process
dies, the only real cost is restarting time (which should be
11 hours ago, Laurent wrote:
>
> About sandboxes and custodians, this is also a nice and pure Racket
> solution, but I'm a bit worried about the memory (and other?)
> overhead that this might incur. Is this doubt justified?
A sandbox can be relatively expensive, but it should definitely be
much
Thank you all for all your answers!
Nikolaus' seem to be simple enough (Linux world for now):
(string-split (file->string "/proc/self/cmdline") "\u")
gives me what I want.
(FYI, the result of this in DrRacket is:
'("/usr/bin/gracket" "-N" "/usr/bin/drracket" "-J" "DrRacket" "-l-"
"drracket/dr
Am Mittwoch, 16. Januar 2013 schrieb Tony Garnock-Jones:
> On 01/15/2013 05:40 AM, Laurent wrote:
> > The purpose is to be able to relaunch the process.
>
> Another approach might be to create an outer wrapper which builds a
> nested namespace, custodian etc, within which your program is
> dynamic-
Two hours ago, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
> On 01/15/2013 05:40 AM, Laurent wrote:
> > The purpose is to be able to relaunch the process.
>
> Another approach might be to create an outer wrapper which builds a
> nested namespace, custodian etc, within which your program is
> dynamic-required.
Sa
In the same vein, a Nanny which creates/destroys a local Place(s). Still
not a full process restart however.
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
> On 01/16/2013 11:49 AM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
>
>> Another approach might be to create an outer wrapper which builds a
>
On 01/16/2013 11:49 AM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
Another approach might be to create an outer wrapper which builds a
nested namespace, custodian etc, within which your program is
dynamic-required.
Here's a simple example showing the basics: https://gist.github.com/4548874
Regards,
Tony
On 01/15/2013 05:40 AM, Laurent wrote:
The purpose is to be able to relaunch the process.
Another approach might be to create an outer wrapper which builds a
nested namespace, custodian etc, within which your program is
dynamic-required.
That way, you can signal to the wrapper to destroy th
There's not currently a way to get the original command-line arguments.
We could probably add something, but I'm not sure of the implications
when, say, you're running a program within DrRacket.
For a particular platform, there may be some way to get the original
command-line arguments that you c
9 matches
Mail list logo