🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <44811@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes:
>Have you considered using a new mechanisim that uses a buffer pool that
>your task doesn't "own". It works like this, you call "OpenIPCPort()"
>and the library does, and  allocates a unique port for you. Then you
>Put messages on it like a PIPE: by writing them in a block. The
> (and more good stuff )
   This is pretty much what i was after with a PORTPIPE: device. 
Also tasks could indicate that they are willing to give up 
ownership of the port in which case the other task would get it 
for a while, and, ..., no data need be copied. In other words
PORTPIPE: could run in a 'data copy mode' or, for processes that 
were willing to be nice and wanted to buy the performance, they
could operate in a 'quid pro quo' mode (much as messages do now)
where you give up ownership of the shared resource and gain performance
thereby.
-- 
ron (rminnich@udel.edu)