Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <3D29D0D9.80702@apache.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 10:50:17 -0700
From: Brian Pane <brianp@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@apr.apache.org
Subject: Re: next steps for changing apr_time_t?
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020708111957.02fa2e00@pop3.rowe-clan.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> apr_time_t is what it is.  But there are a few old-school coders who 
> believe
> that apr_foo_t is nothing but a wrapper for the well-known foo_t.  To 
> appease
> everyone, we need to rename this more explicitly.  I would suggest the 
> final
> name of apr_time_busec_t (if we go with a busec implementation.)  Do the
> same to all apr_time_xxx functions and macros. 


I have reservations about a *busec* name.  That name would
imply a specific implementation, but this should be an abstract
type for better maintainability.  (Fortunately, our new macros,
apr_time_sec() et al, allow us to make it abstract without any
performance loss.)

--Brian