apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sander Striker" <stri...@apache.org>
Subject RE: more notes on the apr_time_t issue
Date Sun, 14 Jul 2002 20:39:39 GMT
> From: Ryan Bloom [mailto:rbb@covalent.net]
> Sent: 14 July 2002 22:22

[...]
> > >A way to compare and operate on time:
> > >
> > >Apr_busec_add
> > >Apr_busec_sub
> > 
> > Those are BS.  This is a SCALAR.  It will always remain a scalar,
> > lest our performance takes a flying leap from the window.
> 
> I may be wrong, but I explicitly remember seeing those macros being
> discussed.

Indeed.  And can we please add them?  It would save us a lot of time (heh)
when we want to switch apr_time_t to yet another (source compatible!)
representation.  Users should be cautioned by saying we don't do guarantees
unless they use the macros.  That the macros are defined to be simple
scalar operations (for this particular choice of implementation) doesn't
matter.

This is IMO all we can do, short of making apr_time_t a true ADT, which we
can't for obvious reasons.

Sander

Mime
View raw message