4 ms·
On this topic of stdin, stdout - wouldn't it be neat if - instead of signals - there was an input channel called stdctrl that you could send control messages in
by cturner 15y ago
On this topic of stdin, stdout - wouldn't it be neat if - instead of signals - there was an input channel called stdctrl that you could send control messages in on.
Glad to read about the scenario at your last place - I've never seen this in action.
- jaylevitt 15y agoAt AOL circa 2000, our application framework had a Tcl interpreter listening on a "control port", so that you could telnet to any app and get stats, change settings, etc. Of course, nowadays that's more commonly done with REST endpoints, which I think would satisfy your stdctrl idea.
- sp332 15y agoWell those are just the defaults, a program can open a lot more sockets if it wants to. IPC is an old problem with a lot of pretty good solutions by now.
- 1amzave 15y agoWell, it's not exactly what you describe (which does sound kind of intriguing), but Linux does offer the signalfd(2) syscall, which allows you to read signals from a file descriptor. Doesn't do much for the sender of said signals, however.
- andrewflnr 15y agoI think Plan 9 does something similar. You send signals to a process by writing to a file in the process's /proc directory.