Claudio Natoli wrote: > > For example, couldn't we write this data into a particular location in > > shared memory, and then pass that location to the child? That is still > > ugly, slow, and prone to failure (shmem being statically sized), but > > ISTM that the proposed implementation already possesses those > > attributes :-) > > I agree that this is a better implementation. > > Bruce, do we implement this now, or just hold it as something to revisit > down the track? I'm all for leaving it as is. > > Moreover, in general, how do we handle things like this? IMHO, I'd rather > live with a few kludges (that don't impact the *nix code) until the Windows > port is actually a reality, and then reiterate (having the discussions as we > go along, however, is necessary). Perhaps adding a TO_REVISIT section to > your Win32 Status Report page? > > Or do people have strong leanings towards "fix as you go along"? Just feels > like that way could see us getting bogged down making things "perfect" > instead of advancing the port...
Let's get it working first. I have added an item to the Win32 status page so we will not forget it. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
