Chris Travers <chris.travers@adjust.com> writes: > However, what I think one could do is use a struct of volatile > sig_atomic_t members and macros for checking/setting. Simply writing a > value is safe in C89 and higher.
Yeah, we could group those flags in a struct, but what's the point?
This was one of two things I noticed in my previous patch on interrupts and loops where I wasn't sure what the best practice in our code is.
If we don't want to make this change, then would there be any objection to me writing up a README describing the flags, and best practices in terms of checking them in our code based on the current places we use them? If the current approach will be unlikely to change in the future, then at least we can document that the way I went about things is consistent with current best practices so next time someone doesn't really wonder.
Attaching a first draft of a readme. Feedback welcome. I noticed further that we used to document signals and what they did with carious processes but that this was removed after 7.0, probably due to complexity reasons.
