[systemd-devel] sd_event_run

[Shawn Landden]

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 6:01 PM, Shawn Landden <shawnlandden at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> <zbyszek at in.waw.pl> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 06:14:40PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>> On Sat, 14.03.15 12:19, Tom Gundersen (teg at jklm.no) wrote:
>>>
>>> > > 1. shouldn't SD_EVENT_PASSIVE become SD_EVENT_INITIAL? "passive" seems strange
>>> > >    in this context.
> How about SD_EVENT_STALE? Stale things are distasteful unless they are
> freshened up.
Nah, Prepared is good.

But this SD_EVENT_PASSIVE and SD_EVENT_RUNNING is incompatible with
making this multithreaded. Instead there could be a function (int
sd_event_references(sd_event *e)) that returns e->n_ref.
>>>
>>> I found it weird to name this INITIAL (or "INIT" or something like
>>> that) since we would return to it every single iteration... For me
>>> "init" kinda implies it's something "fresh", "unused", and hence not
>>> really something we routinely come back to...
>> In a sense it is "fresh" and "unused", because the state after doing
>> an interation of the loop is exactly the same as if the loop never run.
>> (E.g. I don't think it would be wrong to say "I cleaned the couch and
>> restored it to its initial state", even though it obviously has been used.)
>>
>> "Passive" was confusing, so "initial", even if imperfect, seems an
>> improvement. We really want to say "the state in which you started",
>> without implying whether we have been there the whole time or not.
>> I don't know if there's a better word.
>>
>>> > >    Similarly, SD_EVENT_ARMED seems more self-explanatory than PREPARED.
>>> > >    (I don't like PREPARED because it is not obvious whether sources are
>>> > >    prepared to wait on, or events are prepared to be reaped.)
>>>
>>> I called this "prepared" since it what's _prepare() is supposed to get
>>> into...
>>>
>>> But ARMED is fine too...
>>
>> We really should get some native speakers to help out with this :)
>>
>> Maybe sd_event_prepare should be renamed to sd_event_arm?
> Armed is much better because it fits the analogy that events *fire*,
> after which they are pending. Without reading the header I would think
> _prepare() is the same as _new().
>
>>
>> Zbyszek
>> _______________________________________________
>> systemd-devel mailing list
>> systemd-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
>
>
>
> --
> Liberty equality fraternity or death,
>
> Shawn Landden
> ChurchOfGit.com



-- 
Liberty equality fraternity or death,

Shawn Landden
ChurchOfGit.com