From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: proced: ppid of process ID 0 can be 0 Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 06:08:06 +0200 Message-ID: References: <18765.19040.568030.246241@tfkp04.physik.uni-erlangen.de> <18765.29820.997276.703222@tfkp04.physik.uni-erlangen.de> <18765.51840.943986.608296@tfkp04.physik.uni-erlangen.de> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1229918901 16878 80.91.229.12 (22 Dec 2008 04:08:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 04:08:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lekktu@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Roland.Winkler@physik.uni-erlangen.de To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 22 05:09:26 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LEc6d-0002q8-1U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 05:09:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56199 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LEc5Q-0006XQ-Cz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:08:08 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LEc5M-0006X1-7K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:08:04 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LEc5K-0006Wa-L4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:08:02 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44141 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LEc5K-0006WX-G4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:08:02 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout7.012.net.il ([84.95.2.19]:47720) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LEc5K-0000C3-0e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:08:02 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout7.012.net.il by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KC900600FCWQL00@i-mtaout7.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 06:10:30 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.252.83]) by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KC900H6CFLHIA40@i-mtaout7.012.net.il>; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 06:10:30 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (1203?) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:107168 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: Roland Winkler , lekktu@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 21:45:06 -0500 > > The primitives should ensure that what they return forms a forest. You mean a tree. > I.e. under POSIX, they should treat a "ppid == 0" as meaning that > there's no parent (i.e. the data returned to Elisp should never say "the > parent is process 0" but should instead say "this process doesn't have > a parent"). For me, code that calls process-tree-root-p (say) is much more self-explanatory than a test for a missing parent pid attribute. It is also more reliable, since ppid attribute could be missing for some other reason, like failure to access the attribute. So I don't understand why you insist on the above, please feel free to explain what advantages do you see there. Btw, is the above really mandated by Posix? Any references to that?