Shared exe-unit process module #3168
Conversation
pwalski
force-pushed
the
pwalski/ya_process_crate
branch
4 times, most recently
from
cd2223f
to
a059e97
Compare
pwalski
force-pushed
the
pwalski/ya_process_crate
branch
from
a059e97
to
59eb7c2
Compare
pwalski
changed the title
| } | ||
|
|
||
| impl ProcessHandle { | ||
| pub fn new(command: &mut Command) -> Result<ProcessHandle> { | ||
| let process = Arc::new(SharedChild::spawn(command)?); | ||
| #[cfg(windows)] | ||
| let job_object = JobObject::try_new_current()?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I left new_process_group unimplemented for Windows. process_group is roughly equivalent of Windows JobObject, but new_process_group is implemented for Command and I needed to store job_object somewhere, I could not extend Command, so instead I just crate job_object while creating ProcessHandle.
| #[allow(unused)] | ||
| #[cfg(windows)] | ||
| job_object: JobObject, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Having conditionally existing field is hard to maintain. I'm wondering if we could have empty job object implementation for unix?
In general all these conditional compilation in process handling is hard to maintain, because we need to compile with different features to be sure it will compile... But it was already done like this before, so we can leave it as is if it would require to much work.
Resolves: #3167