On Wednesday, April 9, 2014 4:02:10 AM UTC+5:30, Sturla Molden wrote: > On 08/04/14 22:30, Grant Edwards wrote:
> >>> Unix maybe, but what about Windows? Is it efficient to create > >>> processes under Windows? > >> Processes are very heavy-weight on Windows. > > Not surprising given its VMS heritage. I remember running shell > > scripts under VMS on a VAX-11/780 that took hours to do what would > > have taken minutes on an LSI-11 running Unix. The whole Unix "small > > tools working together" paradigm is based on the assumption that > > process creation and death are fast and cheap. > That is one reason software tend to be monolithic on Windows, including > build tools. > Running a configure script used to take forever, but thankfully > computers are getting faster. I was looking at Erlang... And under similar presumptions that I see on this thread (in a different sense!) viz.: Either the messiness of callback hell or the error-proneness of threads However this was Erlang whose basic premise is to question this either-or. And so I was properly told-off by Joe Armstrong (roughly the equivalent of being told off by Guido out here :-) ) http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2012-October/069560.html Note Erlang, Go and Cloud-haskell all set out along a similar route: http://joneisen.tumblr.com/post/38188396218/concurrency-models-go-vs-erlang -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list