[wruza]

This article is quite a roller coaster to get what it is about. As far as I understand it, the author wants SIGINT to become some sort of a universal “cancel” button which may or may not exit a process, because the idea is to stop and rollback to a nearest sensible restart point. E.g. an interactive disk formatting tool may stop lenghty formatting on SIGINT but wouldn’t just exit. It would clean up the mess and return to its menu where e.g. batch configuration happens, so a user doesn’t lose next steps. The author basically wants modern gui features in console via signals.

[mattarm]

Yeah, and as others have pointed out already, many existing interactive terminal programs handle SIGINT in this way. E.g. programming language repls interrupt running code and return to the top level prompt. E.g. mutt (SIGINT will cause mutt to politely asks if you want to exit before doing so).

I think of it this way: we have both SIGINT and SIGTERM for a reason. One "interrupts" and the other "terminates" and there are often good reasons to handle "interrupt" differently from "terminate" -- at least in interactive programs.