Re: PHP pcntl function documentation (and other stuff)

----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Beckham" <danbeck@dealnews.com> To: "Jason Greene" <jason@inetgurus.net> Cc: <php-dev@lists.php.net> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:49 PM Subject: Re: PHP pcntl function documentation (and other stuff) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jason Greene" <jason@inetgurus.net> > To: "Daniel Beckham" <danbeck@dealnews.com> > Cc: <php-dev@lists.php.net> > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 11:35 AM > Subject: Re: PHP pcntl function documentation (and other stuff) > > > > > The system and exec (IMHO) are written very badly in PHP > > > and don't even come close to doing what execv will do. They are pretty > much > > > the same as using backticks but with a few variations. (Getting the exit > > > code and the last line of output sent by the program.) They just aren't > > > suited to the stuff that's done with fork and execv. > > > > Well they are very good at their purpose, which is to take care of > > all the intricacies of spawning another process. > > > > I think that I probably used harsher language then I really meant to when > talking about exec and system. My main beef is that exec (and a few other > PHP functions) use similar names as their (choose your language) > counterparts, but don't make a very good attempt at actually emulating those > counterparts. I personally think that exec would always have been better > off emulating the exec (3) functions instead. But of course, fork() has > been begged for, for eons. Well imagine someone calling exec(3) in a webserver SAPI hehe not good : ) True exec behavior is destructive which is why I agree that pcntl is a good place. > The fact that PHP is open source is a blessing and a curse. The blessing is > that If you don't like how someone wrote a function like system() or exec() > you can just roll your own. The curse is that there end up being three ways > to do something and they could probably all be rolled into one for brevity > and clarity. Yes it really is quite confusing and a little bit of a mess, but we are still stuck with it for backwards compatibility reasons. > > Sounds great. I will try and focus as much time as I can on getting docs > before > > the release. > > Great.. I already have the pcntl_fork and pcntl_waitpid docs done... I'll > probably also do the waitpid macros before I send you something. > > Daniel I took a look at them... Good Job!! As soon as I get my doc karma I can help out. Until then I can add the pcntl_exec function you requested, and I am debating on adding a pcntl_vfork.... -Jason