> > In case you haven't heard about it, ActiveState has > recently signed a > > contract with Microsoft to do some work on Perl on win32. > > Have I ever heard of it! :-) David Grove pulled me into one of his > bouts of paranoia. I think he's calmed down for the moment. It sounds like a :-), but Im afraid I dont understand that reference. When I first heard this, two things sprung to mind: a) Why shouldnt Python push for a similar deal? b) Something more interesting in the MS/Python space is happening anyway, so nyah nya nya ;-) Getting some modest funds to (say) put together and maintain single core+win32 installers to place on the NT resource kit could only help Python. Sometimes I wish we had a few less good programmers, and a few more good marketting type people ;-) > Anyway, I doubt that we coould use their code, as it undoubtedly > refers to reimplementing fork() at the Perl level, not at the C level > (which would be much harder). Excuse my ignorance, but how hard would it be to simulate/emulate/ovulate fork using the Win32 extensions? Python has basically all of the native Win32 process API exposed, and writing a "fork" in Python that only forked Python scripts (for example) may be feasable and not too difficult. It would have obvious limitations, including the fact that it is not available standard with Python on Windows (just like a working popen now :-) but if we could follow the old 80-20 rule, and catch 80% of the uses with 20% of the effort it may be worth investigating. My knowledge of fork is limited to muttering "something about cloning the current process", so I may be naive in the extreme - but is this feasible? Mark.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4