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
