On 16 September 2013 16:03, Martin Decky <[email protected]> wrote:

> I don't really care about the actual prefix. All of file_*, dir_*,
>> vfs_*, vcl_* are fine with me.
>>
>
> I do care, but obviously this is a matter of personal taste and the
> discussion can be endless. Thus anyone with mainline commit access has the
> liberty to merge anything he/she considers reasonable.
>
> And I have the liberty to alter the code later on if I don't consider it
> reasonable :)
>
>
How about this: The pointer handle represents a generic filesystem node
just for the purposes of navigating the client's local image of the
hierarchy, but *_open() returns a numerical handle that is used in
vfs_read(), vfs_write(), vfs_truncate(), etc.
I.e. the functions operating on file's contents would be simple IPC
wrappers, and the fat stuff is used just for navigating the file tree.

Although, I can't figure out what would be a proper name and prefix for the
"generic fs node" type. Both "file" and "dir" suggest a particular kind of
file, and "node" or "tree" are both too non-obvious.



>  So perhaps this change could wait for after the merge and we could go in
>> this one particular case back to handles for the sake of the merge?
>>
>
> +1
>
>
Can do.


-- Jirka Z.
_______________________________________________
HelenOS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.modry.cz/listinfo/helenos-devel

Reply via email to