Eric Wertman schrieb:
> A simple yet dangerous and rather rubbish solution (possibly more of a > hack than a real implementation) could be achieved by using a > technique described above: > > <?php > echo exec('python foo.py');This will spawn a Python interpreter, and not be particularly efficient. You could just as well have used CGI.I'm in a bit of a similar situation. I decided to use python to solve problems where I could, in a more regimented fashion. For instance, I have a set of functions in a script, table.py. After I set up mod_python to handle requests to a single directory with python, I can call this with: <?php include("http://localhost/py/table/nodes";); ?> embedded in the page. This is probably pretty hackish too, but at least it doesn't spawn a new process, and I don't have to solve things that aren't related to display with php.
You mean opening a local-loop socket instead of a anonymous socket, hogging at least another apache process and then possibly spawning another process if the python-script is implemented as real CGI - not fast_cgi or python - is the better solution? I doubt that. More wasteful in all aspects, with small to any gain at all.
Unix uses pipes as IPC all the time. I fail to see why that is "rubbish". Diez -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
