| Date | Wed, 2 Feb 2011 08:50:59 +0100 | From | Richard Cochran <> | Subject | Re: [patch 28/28] posix clocks: Introduce dynamic clocks |
| |
On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 01:49:47PM -0800, john stultz wrote: > I sort of worry about the naming collision with the term posix-clock, as > this is just one type of posix clock (I suspect most folks think of a > posix clock as the clockid passed to the existing posix api). > > Could we maybe use posix-dynclock or posix-fdclock or something? I know > its already been changed from clkdev, so sorry for being finicky here > and not catching this earlier.
A rose by any other name...
I agree that naming (even internal APIs) is important and have no objection to changing the name. I did spend a bit of time considering various alternatives, and now I'm out of ideas.
So, please do change the name if you have a better one.
Thanks, Richard
|