Hi Kevin, Yesterday kevin brintnall wrote:
> Tobi, > > This 2-patch series exposes 'flush' methods to the various language > bindings. the bindings look ok to me, I have applied the patch > I noticed that most of the other API-visible functions are "rrd_X", but > flush is "rrd_cmd_flush". Should we rename to "rrd_flush" to match the > others? The only problem I can see is potential confusion with > "rrdc_flush". Maybe we should rename both? well I think calling it rrd_flush would be nice since it is consistant with the rest of the rrd_* calls and that is a good thing. cheers tobi > Patches to follow... > > _______________________________________________ > rrd-developers mailing list > rrd-developers@lists.oetiker.ch > https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/rrd-developers > > -- Tobi Oetiker, OETIKER+PARTNER AG, Aarweg 15 CH-4600 Olten, Switzerland http://it.oetiker.ch t...@oetiker.ch ++41 62 775 9902 / sb: -9900 _______________________________________________ rrd-developers mailing list rrd-developers@lists.oetiker.ch https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/rrd-developers
