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 <[email protected]> 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 > System::currentTimeMillis, I suspect the Sun/Oracle engineers did this on > purpose to avoid giving the impression that System::nanoTime had anything > to do with wall-clock time. > > With that in mind I prefer the current method names. > > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> 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: [email protected] | [email protected] >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >> > > -- E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
