> I believe ActiveState's Trent Mick has released something along these > lines. Does your proposed API match theirs? No, not at all. There are some issues with this module, both regards the API and the implementation, which I'm not happy with. I tried to establish a discussion with Trent about this, but if I remember correctly, I never recieved a response. Here's some things which I'm not happy with: * There are three different "factory" classes: Process, ProcessOpen, ProcessProxy. I have only one, covering all cases. I think three different classes are confusing to users. Even I have trouble understanding the difference between them. * The code size is very large. The code is complex. * Trent's module always executes things through the shell, and deals with every ugly cornercase that comes from this. * The modules uses destructors, which I'm usually avoiding. So, the chances of getting our modules API-compatible are very small. /Peter Åstrand <astrand at lysator.liu.se>
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