From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <7a892f212376bb182f0c323f8ec320e1@terzarima.net> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 17:33:57 -0300 Message-ID: From: "Federico G. Benavento" To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [9fans] How would you go about implementing this in Plan9? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8b8dc290-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Eugene Gorodinsky wrote: > There's a lot more reasons for using one tab = one process approach. For > chrome it really is a bargain. But for a non-browsing application it might > not be so. > so the UI doesn't hang because webkit is single threaded, so you just fork()/exec() a binary and communicate via a named pipe? in any case, like chrome, which uses some sort of shared bitmap for a media player the player could create and image and share it via nameimage(), then the decoder program would just call namedimage() to get that one and draw to it... hell it could draw directly to the display with image id 0 if you want it, so really for the im client a pipe is more than enough -- Federico G. Benavento