Re: Rename some signal and interrupt handling functions for consistency

On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 08:22:02PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> To make things less confusing, the attached patch renames all the functions
> that are part of the overall signal/interrupt handling system but are *not*
> executed in a signal handler to e.g. ProcessSomething(), rather than
> HandleSomething().

Am I understanding correctly that your plan is to keep the "Handle" prefix
for functions that do run in signal handlers (e.g.,
HandleRecoveryConflictInterrupt())? I don't know how consistent the code
is about that, but it might be nice to establish stricter guidelines for
those, too.

> Any objections?

No objections here. My only concern is that this might break some
third-party code, especially code that uses interrupt.h. I'm not sure it's
worth adding backward-compatibility macros, though.

--
nathan