[systemd-devel] 'tasks' as first-order objects?

[James May]

On 14 August 2010 01:38, Lennart Poettering <lennart at poettering.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 13.08.10 16:22, Adam Spragg (adam at spra.gg) wrote:
>
>>
>> On Friday 13 Aug 2010 15:54:28 Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> > On Fri, 13.08.10 00:18, Adam Spragg (adam at spra.gg) wrote:
>> > > > > So [auditctl] would be something to set to "Type=finish" and
>> > > > > "ValidNoProcess=no".
>> > > > >
>> > > > > (Oh, and if you have a better suggestion for a name of
>> > > > > ValidNoProcess= I am all ears too!)
>> > >
>> > > 'RequiresProcess='?
>> >
>> > Hmm, that would turn around the logic. I'd rathe have an option that
>> > defaults to "off", and when specified may be set on "on".
>>
>> Maybe.
>>
>> I have a long-ingrained dislike of boolean flags/variables/settings that
>> include a "no" or "not" in them. "notfound" is a particular peeve of mine in a
>> codebase I'm currently working on. Deciphering "!notfound" and "notfound"
>> unnecessarily requires more brain cycles than "found" and "!found" would have.
>> I have to stop and check I'm doing what I think I'm doing every time I come
>> across it. I also have the same problem with UIs that have checkboxes marked
>> "disable feature X". It's just *awkward* - more so than it needs to
>> be.
>
> Yes, I share the same belief, which is one of the reasons I'd be happy
> to rename this.

How about "Processless="?

-- James