I use quotes differently than journalists. I use them to indicate "this is a separate sentence that expresses an idea mid-sentence" and to indicate tone shift, not as a quote for a specific person. I use a > prefix for direct quotes.
That exact string isn't from the Github issue, it's a summary of one argument dismissing some of the OpenSSL RNG's worst issues.
Here are two direct quotes if that's what you want:
> forking is not an issue for node.js
> The bucket list of fork-safety issues that would have to be addressed is so long that I think it's safe to say that node.js will never be fork-safe.
There was also off-ticket discussion on IRC where similar arguments were made.
Forking and threading are different things. Forking creates new processes and duplicates memory. It raises entirely different issues from multi-threading, which does neither. See: http://stackoverflow.com/q/2483041/331041
They discussed forking, but did not discuss multi-threading.
Yes. The problem with an in-process RNG and forking is that the RNG state is duplicated, so both processes get the same sequence of numbers. Multithreading just needs locking to prevent corruption because the state is shared.
That exact string isn't from the Github issue, it's a summary of one argument dismissing some of the OpenSSL RNG's worst issues.
Here are two direct quotes if that's what you want:
> forking is not an issue for node.js
> The bucket list of fork-safety issues that would have to be addressed is so long that I think it's safe to say that node.js will never be fork-safe.
There was also off-ticket discussion on IRC where similar arguments were made.