in reply to Re^3: How to multiprocess in Win32? (explained)
in thread How to multiprocess in Win32?

Thanks for the explanation! It looks like all I really need is that "1," in my system call, and I can do away with forking altogether. I'm just trying to launch "fire and forget" exe files here.

system(1, 'this.exe');

I guess my only other question, then, is "why doesn't ActiveState implement something like this?"...

--
Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it - even if I have said it - unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.
(Buddha)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: How to multiprocess in Win32? (explained)
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Oct 26, 2004 at 13:50 UTC
    "why doesn't ActiveState implement something like this?"..

    Could you explain what you mean? system 1, ... works fine on ActiveState?

    Examine what is said, not who speaks.
    "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham
    "Think for yourself!" - Abigail
    "Memory, processor, disk in that order on the hardware side. Algorithm, algorithm, algorithm on the code side." - tachyon
[reply]
[d/l]
      Could you explain what you mean? system 1, ... works fine on ActiveState?
      I meant your workaround for fork, not just "system (1,".
      Considering their current implementation of fork is so broken, it seems like they could implement something similar.

      --
      Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it - even if I have said it - unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.
      (Buddha)
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom