Messages in this thread | | | From | Joerg Schilling <> | Date | Mon, 13 Feb 2006 15:09:36 +0100 | Subject | Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter |
| |
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote:
> > > > I have noticed that the new ...at() system calls are named in what > > appears to be a completely haphazard fashion. In Unix system calls, > > an f- prefix means it operates on a file descriptor; the -at suffix (a > > prefix would have been more consistent, but oh well) similarly > > indicates it operates on a (directory fd, pathname) pair. > > > shmat operates on dirfd/pathname?
Do you have a better proposal for naming the interfaces?
Jörg
-- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |