>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 3:46 AM, Remko Popma wrote:
>
>> I deliberately chose that name to be consistent with the data source
>> (System::nanoTime).
>>
>
Still not liking the new API. Just talkin' : I appreciate your argument
that you "chose that name to be consistent with the data source
(Sys
Right, I figured as much, but it does not look as nice as much it could
be...
Gary
On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 3:46 AM, Remko Popma wrote:
> I deliberately chose that name to be consistent with the data source
> (System::nanoTime).
>
> As to why System::nanoTime is apparently not consistent with
> S
I deliberately chose that name to be consistent with the data source
(System::nanoTime).
As to why System::nanoTime is apparently not consistent with
System::currentTimeMillis, I suspect the Sun/Oracle engineers did this on
purpose to avoid giving the impression that System::nanoTime had anything
Hi All:
In org.apache.logging.log4j.core.LogEvent, we have two timestamp getters:
- getNanoTime() (new 2.4)
- getTimeMillis()
The naming is inconsistent, I propose to change getNanoTime()
to getTimeNanos().
Thoughts?
Gary
--
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
Java Persisten
