odeke-em / vim

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/vim
0 stars 0 forks source link

Unknown option argument: “--multiprocessing-fork” #302

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I have an error on Windows vim version 7.4.417 (no problems on Linux): Unknown 
option argument: "--multiprocessing-fork" . It is related to using python 
multiprocessing. How can I fix that?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by CanisMaj...@gmail.com on 24 Dec 2014 at 10:18

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
The --multiprocessing-fork is no argument for vim. Simply remove it. That is no 
Vim bug here.

Original comment by chrisbr...@googlemail.com on 24 Dec 2014 at 12:14

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I am sorry but could you, please, clarify. What should I remove? 

Original comment by CanisMaj...@gmail.com on 24 Dec 2014 at 12:33

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
The --multiprocessing-fork argument. It should be clear by now, that this is 
now argument for Vim.

Original comment by chrisbr...@googlemail.com on 24 Dec 2014 at 12:35

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
This link might help you.

Embedded python: multiprocessing not working - Stack Overflow
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15636266/embedded-python-multiprocessing-not-
working

Original comment by yukihiro...@gmail.com on 24 Dec 2014 at 12:52

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I understand. Thank you very much for the help. But still I don't see any way 
to wipe out --multiprocessing-fork argument since it is python internal 
modifications (it adds this to argv when spawning the process to *distinguish 
them*). If vim is an executable for multiprocessing how it will know what to do 
(that in some other vim instance I invoked command "py import MyModule; 
MyModule.myfunction()") and that this vim instance is just an auxiliary child 
process.

Original comment by CanisMaj...@gmail.com on 24 Dec 2014 at 4:12

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I think that since vim is a python interpreter then it must accept 
--multiprocessing-fork argument to support multiprocessing spawn method. 
Otherwise this function does not work. I think you need to change the status of 
the issue.

Original comment by CanisMaj...@gmail.com on 24 Dec 2014 at 6:50

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Vim is not (primarily) a python interpreter. Look at the provided stackoverflow 
link. There is nothing we can do about it. Raise an issue with the python 
folks, if you like.

Original comment by chrisbr...@googlemail.com on 24 Dec 2014 at 9:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
And what exactly should I issue there? Because I don't see their fault here. 
They constructed their language in such way for some reasons. Vim uses python 
as an internal interpreter, but it does not fully comply with python rules. 
That is I see the reason.

Original comment by CanisMaj...@gmail.com on 25 Dec 2014 at 1:19

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Ask them how you can avoid, that that particular argument is being used if you 
used an embedded python interpreter (that does not understand that particular 
--multiprocessing argument)

I think the stackoverflow link provides some useful information. Have you tried 
those?

Original comment by chrisbr...@googlemail.com on 25 Dec 2014 at 1:52

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
The stackoverflow link wont work for one simple reason. They change executable 
to python interpreter and it wont work since it a regular python, not embedded 
vim-python, what means there is no vim module there.

I cannot imagine that they say you something helpful, except it is not possible 
to do that, because you cannot avoid this argument it is a vital argument for 
this kind of process spawning, can you? Either interpreter support this kind of 
process spawning or not, I dont see any third possibility here, do you think I 
can be done in any other way, or vim does it any other way? Like I said before 
how vim going to distinguish processes if I will remove this argument (don't 
know if it is possible but still)? 

Original comment by CanisMaj...@gmail.com on 25 Dec 2014 at 3:18