http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1361801/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1361801/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java#newcode364 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java:364: } Total matter of opinion, but seems slightly easier to follow if the thing you track is "nextFlush" ala: long nextFlush = lastFlush + FLUSH_TIMER_MSECS; poll(nextFlush - System.CTM()) // okay to be negative? if (System.CTM() >= nextFlush) { ... } http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1361801/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java#newcode368 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/log/speedtracer/SpeedTracerLogger.java:368: break; FYI: this is a potential behavioral change, the old code would drain the queue to empty after encountering a shutdown. I don't know whether or not this matters in practice. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1361801/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
