On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 03:01:04PM -0500, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > Doesn't this remove the advantage of using apr_time_t's? The whole point
> > of that format was that we were using microseconds instead of seconds. If
> > that is our goal, then why don't we just change what an apr_time_t is?
> >
>
> apr_time_t should maintain 1 microsecond resolution (there are legit uses for
> it). Reducing resolutions should be a runtime or compile time option for
> folks who want speed at the expense of function.
I was going to bring this up later, but what the heck... I would much
prefer a time structure that used time_t seconds and int microseconds
as separate components rather than mixing all of these 100000s through
the code. The fact is that almost every use (all except poll/select)
use seconds as their primary time format, and those system calls that
do use microseconds prefer them as a separate parameter.
....Roy
