>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]
