> On May 9, 2023, at 2:21 PM, Taylor R Campbell > <campbell+netbsd-tech-k...@mumble.net> wrote: > > tl;dr > > I propose adding uiopeek(buf, n, uio) and uioskip(n, uio) which I’m not a fan of uioskip() as a name … I think uioadvance() would be better. Skip implies, to my brain, that the data is being thrown away (even if you’re already consumed it). -- thorpej
- PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, uioskip Taylor R Campbell
- Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, uioskip Mouse
- Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, uioskip Jason Thorpe
- Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, uioskip David Holland
- Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, uiosk... Mouse
- Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, u... Taylor R Campbell
- Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopee... David Holland
- Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, uioskip Jason Thorpe
- Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, uiosk... Johnny Billquist
- Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, u... Taylor R Campbell