Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-users] Brainstorming [WAS: Subject: Formal Review of Proposed Boost.Process library starts tomorrow]
From: Jeff Flinn (TriumphSprint2000_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-14 14:28:38
Oliver Kowalke wrote:
> Am 14.02.2011 19:19, schrieb Klaim - Joël Lamotte:
>>> About the initial question, I've always thought that Boost.Process
>>>> provide :
>>>> 1. A cross-platform way to manipulate processes (child processes)
>>>> managing their "life-time".
>>> 'Managing life-time' means stop, continue, kill children?
> This was what I was requesting too but I got no answer from Boris.
> At least on POSIX we need a framework which deals with sending signals
> and async. handling of delivered signals (not only SIGCHLD).
> Because we have no conclusion how this should be handled by
> boost.process in this review - I suggest that this facility should be
> implemented by another library.
> boost.process could provide code for waiting synchronously on a child
> process (waitpid) - for this purpose the sync. wait could be done in a
> separate thread and the result will be transfered via a future == async.
> waiting on child process.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk