Re: Proposal: B_ARRIER (addresses wapbl performance?)

[Christoph Egger <Christoph_Egger%gmx.de@localhost>]

der Mouse wrote:
>> I'd like to propose a new buffer flag, B_ARRIER.
> 
> I'd actually suggest another name.  As clever and amusing as I find
> that name, being amusing and clever is not the job of the B_* flag
> names; being clear strikes me as substantially more important.  It took
> me, who grew up speaking English, a few seconds to figure out what it
> was supposed to be.  Someone who is not fully fluent in English would
> probably have substantially more trouble.
> 
> I'd suggest B_BARRIER.

I'm not a native english speaker, but I had no trouble to see what
it is. Nonetheless, I also think B_BARRIER is better due to
consistency with the other flag names.

>> "Even experienced UNIX users occasionally enter rm *.* at the UNIX
>>  prompt only to realize too late that they have removed the wrong
>>  segment of the directory structure." - Microsoft WSS whitepaper
> 
> I find that particularly amusing because I can't recall ever running
> "rm *.*" even deliberately; removing everything with a dot in its name
> and nothing else is...not a common operation for me.  (Now, if they'd
> said "rm -f *".... :-)

Right. And they didn't they, it's a common operation. They say it's an
*occasional* operation. Personally, neither "never" nor "occasional"
fits to me. "extremely rarely" fits to me. :)

Christoph