> It isn't supposed to be funny. I want to know why APR folks seem to think > that other applications of APR are as important, or even remotely as > important, as the performance of httpd. I want to know because all of the decisions > that have been made in the name of other application's "needs" have turned > out to be costly mistakes that we've had to revisit later, only to find out > that the other applications would have performed better anyway if we had > simply focused on what we KNOW is needed instead of inventing a whole new > can of worms. >
APR is called the Apache Portable Runtime. it's not called the Apache Httpd Portable Runtime. However, if i understand the argument correctly, this debate centers around depth of precision of this function. (and i may have this completely backwards, apologies if i do). If this is the case, why not provide both: have an apr_utime_t and apr_time_t. One for precise time calculations (usecs) and then one for less precise but faster calculations. my 2 proverbials. -- James
