fork()

[Arne Mueller]

Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
> 
> Bernhard Herzog <herzog at online.de> writes:
> 
> > I fear that in reality the memory is copied after all. If they use
> > the dictionary in any way they are modifying refcounts of at least
> > some of the objects in the dictionary. From the OS's point of view
> > this counts as modifying the memory.
> 
> Eek.  You're right.  Refcounting truly sucks.  :-(

Hm, that means as long as I realy don't look at the data of the parent
the data is shared between parent and child. Thats funny - it's a
useless feature. As soon as a child reference that dictionary  it gets
it's own copy. 

What about shared memory, is it possible to put objects into a shared
memory segment, most advanced language can do that?

	greetings,

	Arne