I did a refactoring of procxx. It's better to create PR or publish it as a separate project?

[eao197]

We found procxx project several years ago and used it from time to time. In the last usage, I found two important issues:

• usage of procxx leads to the termination of the parent process if a child process exits early and closes its input stream. In that case a call to pipe_t::write in the parent throws, then the flush() method is called from a destructor and that flush() throws another time. But because the second throw is performed during stack unwinding that throw leads to std::terminate;
• inability to do some cleanup and preparation actions before the call to execvp() in a child process.

To resolve those issues I've made a refactoring of procxx implementation. Now there are methods that accept special nothrow value and do not throw on error. Instances of std::error_code are returned instead (or std::pair<std::error_code,std::size_t>). Those non-throwing methods are used for cleanup procedures (in destructors, for example).

There is also a variant of process::exec() method that accepts a callback. This callback is called in child/parent processes just after the return from fork().

The current version of my updated procxx fork can be found here (the revisited branch).

I can make a PR, but I think it has a sense only if that PR will be accepted. But because of procxx looks like a frozen project, I'm afraid it won't be accepted.

So I can publish my refactored version under a different name. Like procxxrv (means procxx-revisited) or procxx-ng (means procxx-new-generation). Or something else if you don't want to see usage of procxx prefix in the name of a derived project.

[eao197]

If someone interested in this topic: here is my attempt to reincarnate procxx library under the name procyy.