Process reapers

[Alfred Perlstein]

On Dec 2, 2014, at 1:31 AM, Konstantin Belousov wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 02:43:17PM -0800, Rui Paulo wrote:
>> One comment I have is that we could rename the variables to something more meaningful instead of "p1" or "p2".  If "p1" is the reaper, we could call it "p_reaper".
>> 
> p_reaper is too confusing even to write, it is the same as the name
> of the struct proc member.  p1/p2 is the pattern used in dofork(), so
> I followed it for new code.
> 
> I could rename p1 to something else, but also short, since LIST_*
> constructs are long and clumsy.  Might be, s/p1/rp/ ?

Without too much bike shed… p_reap should work? 'reaper' is fine too.

Having a mix of 2 char vars is very hard to read six months later and for eternity after that. ;)

-Alfred