Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 Apr 2014 22:10:33 +0200 | From | "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] locks: rename file-private locks to file-description locks |
| |
On 04/21/2014 09:06 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 03:04:10PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: >> I think what you mean is that there is no need that we expose the name >> "struct file". My point is that "struct file" is actually a much >> _better_ name than "file description". Heck, "open file object" would >> be better name than "file description". > > Open file description is what all current standards use. I'm pretty > sure really old ones just used open file,
("open file description" was already in SUSv1 (1994))
> but struct file has never > been used in an API description.
Exactly.
> Introducing it now entirely out of > context is not helpful at all.
In principle, I agree, though it might be helpful for some people to mention this term in a side-note in, say, open(2).
Cheers,
Michael
-- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
| |