From: "Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]" <lavr@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov>
To: "cygwin@cygwin.com" <cygwin@cygwin.com>
Subject: RE: Replacing fork/exec with spawn question
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 19:51:04 +0000
Message-ID: <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D016A50@MLBXv04.nih.gov>
References: <5561519E-4216-47A7-A020-EF2EA8E45A56@cloudwerx.com>
In-Reply-To: <5561519E-4216-47A7-A020-EF2EA8E45A56@cloudwerx.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

>In particular, the code I'm looking to patch does a typical fork/exec and uses 2 pipes to communicate bi-directionally parent to child. The
>pipes are throwing me off as to if cygwin spawn is usable.

I had no problems using fork/exec on Cygwin, even though it is mentioned to be inefficient in the documentation.  If the spawn rate
of your child processes is not high, it should work just well...

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple