Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:25:14 -0500 | From | Casey Dahlin <> | Subject | Re: [RESEND][RFC PATCH v2] waitfd |
| |
Scott James Remnant wrote: > That's pretty neat, much nicer than what we had before. So what about > waitfd() [I think I've slightly changed Casey's API here, or he changed > my proposed one <g>]? > I think you might have changed the argument order slighly, but other than that, counting the corrections I've made from feedback here, its about the same.
--CJD
| |