On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> time [(apr_time_t]] Enter
> APR_USEC_PER_SEC [(apr_time_t)100] Enter
Ah. I missed the fact that APR_USEC_PER_SEC has a built-in cast.
Nevermind.
--Cliff
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> It seems that we've decided sometime back that all macro-fns should be
> declared in ucase. Now, we can debate that issue again, but if someone
> could pull up a reference to that thread in the archives it would be
> most cool.
Somewhere in [EMA
At 12:06 PM 6/12/2002, you wrote:
On 12 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +#define APR_TIME_USEC(time) ((apr_int32_t)(time) % APR_USEC_PER_SEC)
> +
> +#define APR_TIME_SEC(time) ((apr_int64_t)(time) / APR_USEC_PER_SEC)
> +
> +#define APR_TIME_FROM_SEC(sec) ((apr_time_t)(sec) * APR_USEC_
At 03:29 PM 6/12/2002, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
There is no reason for them to be all-uppercase. I hate it when people
use uppercase for functions, including macro functions. All-uppercase
is a convention for symbolic constants, not functions.
It seems that we've decided sometime back that all macr
There is no reason for them to be all-uppercase. I hate it when people
use uppercase for functions, including macro functions. All-uppercase
is a convention for symbolic constants, not functions.
Roy
At 01:06 PM 06/12/2002, Cliff Woolley wrote:
On 12 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +#define APR_TIME_USEC(time) ((apr_int32_t)(time) %
APR_USEC_PER_SEC)
> +
> +#define APR_TIME_SEC(time) ((apr_int64_t)(time) /
APR_USEC_PER_SEC)
> +
> +#define APR_TIME_FROM_SEC(sec) ((apr_time_t)(sec
On 12 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +#define APR_TIME_USEC(time) ((apr_int32_t)(time) % APR_USEC_PER_SEC)
> +
> +#define APR_TIME_SEC(time) ((apr_int64_t)(time) / APR_USEC_PER_SEC)
> +
> +#define APR_TIME_FROM_SEC(sec) ((apr_time_t)(sec) * APR_USEC_PER_SEC)
> +
> +#define APR_T
I'm trying to pre-simplify any future patch we might choose to apply for
time handling. Seems like we should clean house before trying any new
games with apr_time_t (including -renaming- apr_time_t and other symbols
that have confused porters.)
I notice especially that server->timeout seems to be
This is what I'm talking about.
You make a change. Then you decide to revert it because you say it breaks
something. Then you decide that it really didn't break things after all and
put it back in.
Of course, then we have the whole issue that reordering these things is
potentially bogus in the fi
