Dominic Mitchell sent the following bits through the ether:
I think the python scheme of creating a bytecode file on the first run
is better, but I'm not sure how amenable perl's code tree is to being
flattened and restored (this may be why we haven't seen a perl-java
compiler).
ByteCache -
Dominic Mitchell wrote:
And you'd have to make the daemon threaded, or end up running multiple
pre-forking daemons to do the job. At which point, you're only saving
the fork time and the parse time, which depending on how much effort it
is to complete the above, may not be much of a saving
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 10:31:44AM +0100, Simon Wistow wrote:
Dominic Mitchell wrote:
And you'd have to make the daemon threaded, or end up running multiple
pre-forking daemons to do the job. At which point, you're only saving
the fork time and the parse time, which depending on how
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Simon Wistow wrote:
Somebody tell me why this is a stupid idea because I can't think of any
obvious reason but if there wasn't then I'm sure sombody would have
already done it [0] ...
Similar principle to mod_perl, a perl script is run but instead of a
normal
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 09:54:01PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
is this anything like wot FastCGI does .. or is that summat different?
Since 'this' is a bit muddy I couldn't say, though I do know that
FastCGI works as a constantly running coprocess, so maybe
--
Richard Clamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
