On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Thu 23 Feb 2012 16:49, Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I just want to do my negative vote when I saw "choose thead then fork
> > die", but I see "open-process" soon. ;-)  So, what's the difference
> > between "primitive-fork" and "open-process"? If they're different, I
> > think much code to be modified for me...I believe I'm not the only
> > layman to use "fork" and "thread" both.
>
> Open-process is at the guts of the (ice-9 popen) modules.  Open-pipe* is
> a thin wrapper around it -- see "Pipes" in the manual.
>
> Basically open-pipe* / open-process does a fork(), and then an exec().
> Doing this yourself in Scheme is actually impossible with threads,
> because you'll need to take Scheme strings and produce C strings in the
> current locale, to pass to the exec call.  That involves malloc, iconv,
> and libgc allocation, and none of them are guaranteed to work after a
> fork(), in a multithreaded program.
>
>
I think I could use pipes to handle some sub-process rather than do it with
fork manually. But I must create a daemon, it can't avoid to use fork, will
this circumstance cause problems if I use threads after it?


> Andy
> --
> http://wingolog.org/
>