> On Aug. 28, 2015, 4:45 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
> > Why? Everyone knows kill(2) sends a signal while signal(2) installs a
> > signal handler...
>
> Jie Yu wrote:
> IMO, that naming is confusing, and should be 'signal' and 'install'.
>
> Joerg Schad wrote:
> This is actually answering
> On Aug. 28, 2015, 4:45 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
> > Why? Everyone knows kill(2) sends a signal while signal(2) installs a
> > signal handler...
>
> Jie Yu wrote:
> IMO, that naming is confusing, and should be 'signal' and 'install'.
>
> Joerg Schad wrote:
> This is actually answering
On Aug. 28, 2015, 4:45 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
Why? Everyone knows kill(2) sends a signal while signal(2) installs a
signal handler...
IMO, that naming is confusing, and should be 'signal' and 'install'.
- Jie
---
This is an
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37894/#review96883
---
Why? Everyone knows kill(2) sends a signal while signal(2) installs
On Aug. 28, 2015, 4:45 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
Why? Everyone knows kill(2) sends a signal while signal(2) installs a
signal handler...
Jie Yu wrote:
IMO, that naming is confusing, and should be 'signal' and 'install'.
This is actually answering a discussion here
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37894/#review96897
---
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [37894]
All tests passed.
-
On Aug. 28, 2015, 4:45 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
Why? Everyone knows kill(2) sends a signal while signal(2) installs a
signal handler...
Jie Yu wrote:
IMO, that naming is confusing, and should be 'signal' and 'install'.
Joerg Schad wrote:
This is actually answering a
On Aug. 28, 2015, 4:45 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
Why? Everyone knows kill(2) sends a signal while signal(2) installs a
signal handler...
Jie Yu wrote:
IMO, that naming is confusing, and should be 'signal' and 'install'.
Joerg Schad wrote:
This is actually answering a