"Stephen R. van den Berg" <srb@xxxxxxx> writes: > Solution A is what you propose, but which I find less appealing because > any future magic to actually setup the handler needs to be maintained > and updated in two places. Well, A is attractive because it leaves the window open for us to later not rearming it unconditionally from child_handler(). I happen to think that the interface we will use to call "signal()" is much less likely to change than what we would do in child_handler(). > Solution C is what follows your train of thought better, because it > future-proofs the setup as well as the handler. Surely, we could take this route as the logical conclusion from my maintainability concerns, except that, if we are to make things as fine grained as you suggest, we would definitely will not have a single "setup", but "setup" and "rearm" as separate functions. Perhaps "setup" may start using sigaction() with SA_RESETHAND cleared, and we can make "rearm" truly a no-op everywhere. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
