Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc] Boost.Process done
From: Ilya Sokolov (ilyasokol_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-08-19 16:29:11

Daniel Trebbien wrote:
>>> Is there a way to further remove platform dependence in handling the
> "exit
>>> code"?
>> You mean the WIFEXITED et al macros? We had a status class in previous
> Boost.Process versions which encapsulated the exit code. However the design
> of the class was not really cross-platform as member functions like exited()
> were clearly added for POSIX systems only and didn't make sense on Windows
> (exited() for example always returned true). Thus the question is what to
> make platform-independent if a concept doesn't exist on a platform. :-)

The existence of boost::status would also force to know more than one
interface to the same values.

> A while ago when I was thinking about this same problem, I considered using
> Windows' debugging mechanism (process creation flag DEBUG_ONLY_THIS_PROCESS)
> to obtain this information. I don't know if debugging a process will affect
> its execution in some way, or whether the performance will be substantially
> impacted, but it might be interesting to see if this approach would work.

IIRC, DEBUG_ONLY_THIS_PROCESS requires special privilege.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at