>> BSD has curproc, but that is considerably less likely to be
>> used in "inoccent code" than "current". I mean, "current what?".
>> It could be anything, current privledges, current process, current
>> thread, the current time...
>
>I see and I assume calling a random collection of data
>
> u.something
>
>in BSD was even more logical 8)
The only place I've seen this in BSD is for defining a "union" of
data within a structure. I don't think its ever been #defined into
a namespace.
>current is a completely rational name. The problem with current on some of
>our ports right now is that its a #define. That is a trap for the unwary and
>one day wants fixing.
Exactly.
>curproc would be incorrect for linux since its the current task,
>and a task and unix process are not the same thing
I'm aware of the difference. I only mentioned "curproc" as an example of
similar brokeness that has less of a chance of catching the uninitiated.
What about "curtask" or "curthread"?
-- Justin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 15 2000 - 21:00:29 EST