Re: Python (was Re: I did not inhale)

On 2024-08-18 17:45, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:

On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 12:19:10 +0200
"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> boringly babbled:

On 2024-08-18 10:30, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>

The windows process API is crippled which is why threading is the main
parallel processing method in Windows and has been since 3.0.

>
Threading is the main method because of its performance in a tight
coupled application. Crossing the process borders is very expensive.

 Most (all?) versions of unix use copy-on-write when forking

You seems do not understand that spawning a process is not an issue of interprocess communications. It is synchronization, e.g. events, mutexes which is.

Also shared memory is pretty cheap too.

Again, you need to synchronize in order to access shared objects, not to mention elaboration of such objects, e.g. calling constructors and destructors. With threads there is a linker support in most languages. With processes you are on your own.
In the same library you might find portable implementation of basic communication objects and compare Windows vs Linux vs BSD implementations:
    http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/components.htm#12

No idea what the pages of all that crap is.

Hmm, if you ever dealt with networking applications you should have had some idea...

Windows sockets are not integers ,

Windows did many things wrong, but accessing file descriptors by numbers is beyond even Windows. In Windows a file is an OS object. You access it getting an opaque handle to. Note that a handle can be marshaled from one process to another. Try that with process-local numbers!

they can't be multiplexed with file
descriptors, pipes etc in a single call.

Of course it can. Windows overlapped I/O supports sockets.

fork() copies the entire process space. No idea what you mean by "system
objects". Must be some windows thing.

>
Objects managed by the OS.

 Like what? Why does the OS need to manage "objects"?

Like a graphic context or a mutex. Things that leak if the process dies unless the OS takes care of.

I'm not talking about now, I was talking about when NT came out. Learn to
read.

Honestly I do not know what you are talking about. The option to change the scheduling interval existed in Windows NT.
If you want to compare Windows vs UNIX API, create a table and list commonly used process communication things. In the cells write the API call. E.g. mutex, pipe, pulse event etc.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de