>Wasn't it somebody else?<

Randall maybe...

/Henrik


On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:09 PM, Tomas Hlavaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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]
>
-- 
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to