[racket] adding other objects to custodian

From: Eli Barzilay (eli at barzilay.org)
Date: Mon Jul 5 17:35:25 EDT 2010

On Jul  5, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> I still think that would cause problems with job control shell if it
> were the default mode in Racket. That is, if Racket starts creating
> process groups, then it stops being "well behaved" itself.
> As a mode specifically selected by a programmer (Robby's
> suggestion), it seems ok.

Reading more man pages etc, it seems that process groups are intended
to be used for the kind of process control you find in shells, and
they (shells) usually use them only in interactive mode.  So it looks
like deferring this behavior to a parameter that is off by default is
generally a good idea (and it could be on in some future shell-like
language).  But I still think that the default custodian shutdown
behavior should be to kill all subprocesses, regardless of any
sub-subprocesses that are not visible.

          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!

Posted on the users mailing list.