[fpc-pascal] fcl-process, SimpleIPC and pipes

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Juha Manninen wrote:
> I must implement communication between 2 processes.
> I believe SimpleIPC is good for that purpose and it is well tested in
> a cross-platform system (Lazarus <-> ChmHelp).
> 
> Named pipes were suggested to me. I would like to know the benefits /
> handicaps of SimpleIPC compared to named pipes. I will have to answer
> such questions myself soon.
> 
> fcl-process also has pipes unit and then "pipesipc" which apparently
> does not use pipes. (?)

The semantics of names pipes varies across different OSes. I've used the 
unix equivalent on Linux for the specific reason that I wanted to 
explore issues of naming etc., but porting to Windows turned out to be 
problematic despite my having used the MS/IBM variant in the past.

Use SimpleIPC unless you have an informed reason not to.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]