Kirill Korotaev <dev@xxxxx> writes: > Totally agree with Dave. > Current code looks like a mess of word 'pid'. Yes the current code appears to be a mess of the word pid. > Eric, why do you object so much? it doesn't change any functionality at all > just makes code a bit more readable/clear. Because the suggestions I have seen are based on a partial understanding of struct pid, and the suggested renames will reinforce misunderstandings of what struct pid is. I think having a core data structure named in a way that suggests it is less then it is and reinforces peoples misconceptions is likely to be more of a problem for maintenance than having your eyes glaze over with seeing pid pid pid pid pid pid pid. Further if we can't find a better name a rename is simply useless noise. Please let's address the of peoples eyes glazing over but not by renaming struct pid. But by renaming the other sructures, variables of field names that surround it. Especially in kernel/pid.c where anything that is local doesn't need a global prefix. Eric _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
