Is this really 'news'? Or just someone making big of known limitations?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: New "safe signals" gotcha?
by ig (Vicar) on May 22, 2009 at 01:41 UTC

    It's not new(s) to me, but there will always be many for whom signals are new and enigmatic.

    I think forking a sub-process and killing it if it doesn't complete before the timeout expires is a simple and effective solution to the problem. Whenever there is a risk of arbitrarily bad code to recover from, encapsulating it in a separate process is, in my experience, very helpful.

Re: New "safe signals" gotcha?
by Anonymous Monk on May 22, 2009 at 01:32 UTC
    Its not news, its a paraphrase of perlipc