The new std.process is ready for review

[Lars T. Kyllingstad]

On Sunday, 24 February 2013 at 18:05:14 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky 
wrote:
> 24-Feb-2013 21:41, Lars T. Kyllingstad пишет:
>> On Saturday, 23 February 2013 at 11:31:21 UTC, Lars T. 
>> Kyllingstad wrote:
>>>
>>> Pull request:
>>> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/1151
>>>
>>> Code:
>>> https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos/blob/std-process2/std/process2.d
>>>
>>> Documentation:
>>> http://www.kyllingen.net/code/std-process2/phobos-prerelease/std_process2.html
>>>
>>
>> Ok, a new version with non-blocking wait is up.
>
> asyncWait would be less verbose :)

To me, "asynchronous" implies that something is going on in the 
background that will produce a result in the future.  That is not 
what happens here.

I agree that nonBlockingWait() is less than ideal, though, mainly 
because it is an oxymoron. :)  I considered "status", "isAlive", 
etc., but I think it is important to emphasise the fact that if 
the process *has* terminated, nonBlockingWait() has the same, 
perhaps non-obvious, effects as wait():

On POSIX, it makes the OS clean up after the process.
On Windows, it closes the process handle.
On all platforms, it invalidates the processID and osHandle 
properties of the Pid object.

If you or anyone else have a better suggestion, I'm all ears.

Lars