Am 08.05.2012 18:12, schrieb Matej Nanut: > On Monday, 7 May 2012 at 22:56:07 UTC, mta`chrono wrote: >> What do you meant by "D alternatives to wait() and fork() that could be >> used with ptrace()". Maybe I don't understand your intention. > > Nevermind with that; I've been confused since there are exec*() > functions in std.process, but no wait() and fork(). I think there's a > new std.process in the works that has more D-ish ways to do these. > > And thanks for the core.* VS std.c.* clarification. I didn't even think > of using core.* all the way for libc bindings.
But consider that fork() is a very specific UNIX syscall. There is nothing similar like that on Windows. That's maybe why they didn't wrap it in Phobos. Maybe the same applies to wait() that seems to rely on the UNIX signal stuff. But there should be some kind of derivate on windows, too. But neverthenless you are free to use every C-Funktion. You just need some kind of definition to tell dmd to create the right symbols. If the definition is already present in druntime, it's fine - just use it! otherwise you have to define it yourself. > > If struct method names are mangled, does that mean that that way of > doing it doesn't work? I'll try it anyway, to try and get rid of a few > extra files. It shouldn't work. But you can add another custom ptrace method (_NOT_ extern(C)) with different operators. If you can give more information of your superior intention (what are you going to create?) then I'll might provide a better assistance!
