Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751238AbWC3BE4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:04:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751334AbWC3BEz (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:04:55 -0500 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:40832 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751238AbWC3BEz (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:04:55 -0500 Message-ID: <442B2EB2.4040401@garzik.org> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:04:50 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060313) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Andrew Morton , Jens Axboe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] splice support References: <20060329122841.GC8186@suse.de> <20060329143758.607c1ccc.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.1 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-3.5 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 657 Lines: 21 Linus Torvalds wrote: > The "destination first" convention is insane. It only makes sense for > assignments, and these aren't assignments. I agree. But alas, sendfile(2) is defined as destination first: > ssize_t sendfile(int out_fd, int in_fd, off_t *offset, size_t count) which begs the question, do we want to be different from sendfile(2), and confuse a segment of the programmer populace? :) Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/