Add sub-process support about ppytty HOT 4 CLOSED

More thoughts:

• There could be a way of having a task feed data to a process' input, via the PTY.
• There could be a way of having a task monitor a process' output, again via the PTY.
• Should there be a trap to "destroy" a spawned process? Or should we go for a more low-level (but more controllable) "send signal" trap?

PS: Copied to first comment to be accounted in issue progress.

from ppytty.

More thoughts:

• There could be a way of supporting out of band bidirectional task <-> process communication.
  • Needs to be other than stdin/out/err based (given those are handled by the associated terminal).
  • Maybe pipes could be used.
  • Will we need new traps for that or can existing ones be reused, like message-send / message-wait?

PS: Copied to first comment to be accounted in issue progress.

from ppytty.

IMPORTANT:

• Factor out all real I/O calls (like os.write/read, fcntl.fcntl/ioctl) to the kernel hw.py module.

Note:

• Needs thinking, otherwise, tests running under the "no i/o" test cases fail to "wake" the select via the "child terminated" pipe write.

PS: Copied to first comment to be accounted in issue progress.

from ppytty.

Closing after merging PR #104.

Follow-up issues regarding terminal input:

• Fix low-level I/O loop preventing some input from being forwarded to PTYs (#105).
• Fix cursor visibility across process window focusing (#106).
• Visually indicate focus changes (#107).

from ppytty.