From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: QUERY: w32 sub process implementation Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 06:23:36 +0300 Message-ID: References: <46C8B346.8020408@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1187580240 14150 80.91.229.12 (20 Aug 2007 03:24:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 03:24:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, jasonr@gnu.org To: dhruva Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 20 05:23:55 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IMxrt-0001Ne-DA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 05:23:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IMxrs-0002uw-Tx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 23:23:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IMxrp-0002rz-65 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 23:23:49 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IMxrm-0002mo-BD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 23:23:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IMxrl-0002ma-Rz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 23:23:45 -0400 Original-Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il ([213.8.233.22]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IMxrk-00053c-KQ; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 23:23:44 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([81.5.33.70]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) with ESMTP id HOV73660 (AUTH halo1); Mon, 20 Aug 2007 06:20:51 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: (message from dhruva on Mon, 20 Aug 2007 07:49:44 +0530) X-Detected-Kernel: FreeBSD 4.7-5.2 (or MacOS X 10.2-10.4) (2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:76800 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 07:49:44 +0530 > From: dhruva > Cc: Emacs Devel > > On 8/20/07, Jason Rumney wrote: > > dhruva wrote: > > > Using ASYNC read and registering callbacks in wait, I feel we can > > > completely do away with threads for sub procs. > > Wil this work on Windows 95/98/ME? According to the MSDN docs, > > Could we have a new implementation (and decide at configure time) for > the newer versions on windows only. Configure-time decisions are not a good idea, since Windows binaries are habitually copied between machines, and because many users install a precompiled binary distribution from ftp.gnu.org instead of building from sources. So any such decisions must be run-time decisions. > I agree we need to support older versions of windows OS but IMHO, > should also move forward. There are still many users of Windows 9x, and we don't want to drop their support. Any move forward should not break Windows 9x.