Hi Henrik, > Well Thomas, I see that they used PHP in that test which means > they're using the beloved Apache
probably. > which I think you have bashed earlier for its forkedness etc, this Wasn't it somebody else? ;-) Apache tries to be clever about forking, maintaining a process pool for example or using modules to avoid forking for each request. > leads me to believe that it should be comparable with the PicoServer > since they both fork and so on, correct or no? PicoLisp is not trying to be clever in the above way. > You think Apache is faster than the PicoServer despite all its I don't know. I did not make an opinion on this yet. > bloatedness, maybe through the fact that it's compiled? PicoLisp and its web server is mostly compiled too. But we could argue about that one for ever;-) That's one of the reasons I found the discussion about Lisp in hardware interesting (link posted at the beginning of this thread). Cheers, Tomas -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
