I think I'm convinced it's worthwhile to try harder at getting
cross-process channels-over-channels working. It would result in a lot less
churn, for sure. The fact that they have to be transmitted out of band is
an interesting serialization challenge, but it shouldn't be insurmountable.
I think t
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 3:21 AM, Robert O'Callahan
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Patrick Walton
> wrote:
>
> > In theory you can use cmsg on POSIX systems to send channels over
> > channels, by treating channels as file descriptors. I tried this first,
> and
> > I believe it actually
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Patrick Walton wrote:
> In theory you can use cmsg on POSIX systems to send channels over
> channels, by treating channels as file descriptors. I tried this first, and
> I believe it actually worked well on Linux. But on Mac I ran into all sorts
> of (as far as I
On 19/06/15 00:40, Patrick Walton wrote:
In an effort to keep this sort of thing from happening again, I'd like to
suggest that all new code that spawns threads and passes channels or boxed
objects over channels not be allowed to pass review until audited for
multiprocess safety up until the mul
In theory you can use cmsg on POSIX systems to send channels over channels,
by treating channels as file descriptors. I tried this first, and I believe
it actually worked well on Linux. But on Mac I ran into all sorts of (as
far as I can tell) kernel bugs, including kernel panics and data loss. It
5 matches
Mail list logo
