On 2023-05-10 14:00, Jason Thorpe wrote:
On May 9, 2023, at 3:09 PM, Taylor R Campbell
<campbell+netbsd-tech-k...@mumble.net> wrote:
- uiopeek leaves uio itself untouched (it may modify the source/target
buffers but it's idempotent).
Hm… I’m having second thoughts about uiopeek(), as well. It implies a
direction (“peek” feels like “read”, and “write” would feel more like a
“poke”). I think uiocopy() is a better name, and I think it is sufficiently
different from uiomove() (“move” implies a sortof destructive-ness that “copy”
does not).
I would sortof agree. But for me, "peek" more suggests that you are
looking at the content, but intentionally leaving the data in there for
something else to later pick up/process. copy seems to more
appropriately describe what the intent is.
Also, skip for also implies that you are skipping over the data,
intentionally not interested in it. After a copy, I would feel it would
be more describing to say advance rather than skip (or if someone else
have another good verb for it, I'm all ears...)
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: b...@softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
