Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

2009-02-24 Thread Daniel Ruoso
Em Seg, 2009-02-23 às 19:49 -0800, Larry Wall escreveu: On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 04:01:40PM +1300, Martin D Kealey wrote: : Conceptually I think they should all go in add-on(s), however I suspect that : when an exception is thrown inside a signal handler, cleanly unwinding the : call chain will

Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

2009-02-24 Thread Timothy S. Nelson
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Daniel Ruoso wrote: These signal events will presumably be processed by some kind of underlying event handler that mediates among any and all user-visible event handlers within the process. Now *that* made my eyes shine. ;) I'm in favour of discussing this idea

Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

2009-02-24 Thread Timothy S. Nelson
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Daniel Ruoso wrote: Em Seg, 2009-02-23 às 19:49 -0800, Larry Wall escreveu: On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 04:01:40PM +1300, Martin D Kealey wrote: : Conceptually I think they should all go in add-on(s), however I suspect that : when an exception is thrown inside a signal

Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

2009-02-23 Thread Leon Timmermans
I think most forms of IPC should be addons, if only because they have inherent unportability. Stuff like sockets and pipes should be in obviously, signals maybe (they have lots of portability issues, but they may be too often used to just drop), but things like SysV IPC really shouldn't. Anything

Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

2009-02-23 Thread Leon Timmermans
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Timothy S. Nelson wayl...@wayland.id.au wrote: On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Leon Timmermans wrote: I think most forms of IPC should be addons, if only because they have inherent unportability. Stuff like sockets and pipes should be in obviously, signals maybe (they

Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

2009-02-23 Thread Martin D Kealey
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Timothy S. Nelson wrote: I have a quick question here. S16 claims to be about IPC, IO, and Signals. So far, it's mostly about IO. My question is, is it intended that IPC and/or signals be part of the core, or should they be converted to addons like Form.pm?

Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

2009-02-23 Thread Larry Wall
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 04:01:40PM +1300, Martin D Kealey wrote: : On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Timothy S. Nelson wrote: : I have a quick question here. S16 claims to be about IPC, IO, and : Signals. So far, it's mostly about IO. My question is, is it intended : that IPC and/or signals be part of

Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

2009-02-22 Thread Timothy S. Nelson
I have a quick question here. S16 claims to be about IPC, IO, and Signals. So far, it's mostly about IO. My question is, is it intended that IPC and/or signals be part of the core, or should they be converted to addons like Form.pm? Thanks,