tech-kern archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: __{read,write}_once



On 22.11.2019 02:42, Robert Elz wrote:
>     Date:        Fri, 22 Nov 2019 01:04:56 +0100
>     From:        Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost>
>     Message-ID:  <1a9d9b40-42fe-be08-d7b3-e6ecead5b55f%gmx.com@localhost>
> 
> 
>   | I think that picking C11 terminology is the way forward.
> 
> Use a name like that iff the intent is to also exactly match the
> semantics implied, otherwise it will only create more confusion.
> 
> kre
> 

I think this matches. We want to make operation in 'single operation'
(or looking like so) and 'atomic' is a settled name in English (there
are options like: 'integral', 'intrinsic', 'elemental', 'essential',
'fundamental' or 'single operation').

If there are stronger feelings against it, I would go for
'__write_singleop()', '__read_singleop()'.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index