Subject: Re: Avoiding microtime(9) global state
To: None <fredb@NetBSD.org>
From: Martin Husemann <email@example.com>
Date: 06/30/2004 17:07:42
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 09:55:15AM -0500, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> What does the "_ng" stand for? (no global? no good?)
> I think it would be cleaner to simply drop the monoticity requirement
> of microtime(), and create a microtime1() for any callers that really
> need the old semantics.
That's equivalent, only with different names, to what I tried to say.
Fine with me.
David Leight suggested that it might be a good idea to drop any notion of
wall clock time while changing microtime() - letting it return "system up
time" instead. The (few) callers that are interested in real (external) time
could add the offset itself.