Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: OT: Windows (Was: Re: Open Source does not mean easily
 re-compile-able)
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2025 22:13:05 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <vlcbpg$l1os$8@dont-email.me>
References: <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me>
	<wwvh66p9ntv.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <vkmjos$284i0$1@news.xmission.com>
	<86wmflc83k.fsf@example.com> <vkncr9$3suk2$1@dont-email.me>
	<vkne4c$3t9p2$1@dont-email.me> <vknes1$3tgb8$1@dont-email.me>
	<vknfo3$3tlrt$1@dont-email.me> <vkpkn3$ga7s$1@dont-email.me>
	<slrnvn33ai.btv.apple.universe@freight.zombinet>
	<vks674$14lgi$1@dont-email.me> <vl5jdp$38s8m$1@dont-email.me>
	<0azdP.296066$DYF8.131534@fx14.iad> <vl7bf3$3j0kk$1@dont-email.me>
	<1PVdP.468818$oR74.302907@fx16.iad> <vlb1j3$dolo$1@dont-email.me>
	<87frlyrf2e.fsf_-_@example.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 23:13:05 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1ee0f616641d8aa5c39c6c84e5fd9339";
	logging-data="689948"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19u6jMftkdF26ph3EilBGDM"
User-Agent: Pan/0.161 (Chasiv Yar; )
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wzRkjZNTns1vetPijkJvm+Rlp40=

On Sat, 04 Jan 2025 08:31:05 -0300, Salvador Mirzo wrote:

> For instance, is there any Windows software that
> handles a TCP connection in an accept-fork-exec fashion?

Almost certainly not. Because process creation is an expensive operation 
on Windows.

Windows NT was masterminded by Dave Cutler, who was previously responsible 
for the VMS OS at his previous employer, DEC. He was a Unix-hater, part of 
a bunch of them at DEC. They would instinctively turn away from Unix ways 
of doing things, like forking multiple processes. So the systems they 
created did not encourage such techniques.