Chris Pickett <pkch...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> First at all you do not go through fork() and be a lot faster.
>
> Second you do not have ARG_MAX and other process-based limitations,
> e.g. the list and size of arguments passed to builtin commands and
> shell functions is only limited by memory (thank again Roland for
> giving us a 64bit ksh93 :) ).
> With builtin our scripts can't trip over the ancient Solaris limits
> for ARG_MAX (if anyone has time, please file a bug to get ARG_MAX
> removed completely.).
Then it would make sense to define a standard for the interface of a reentrant
utility in a shared library.
Not a bad idea but there are currently different and partially incompatible
models for such an interface.
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
shell-discuss mailing list
shell-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/shell-discuss
