On 8/18/07, Dominik Vogt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 09:22:44PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote: > > I don't like ListenOnly modules because it's dependent on how modules > > talk with fvwm at present. I'd really prefer a mechanism that can't > > cripple us in the future. And IMHO the best way to do it is to have a > > module doing the interface. It may not be as light as directly talking > > to fvwm, but it's not much heavier. And it will eventually be replaced > > by the todo-3.0 proposed socket mechanism. > > Well, the pipe-mechanism has one big advantage: Modules get a > SIGPIPE when whem dies and are killed automatically. That's not > trivial to do with sockets.
BTW, SOCK_STREAM sockets do generate a SIGPIPE when the program tries to read or write on a dead socket. Cheers, Renato
