Re: [PATCH 2/2] clock_nanosleep.2, nanosleep.2: Use 'duration' rather than 'request'

Alejandro Colomar
2024-03-05T01:11:43Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 889 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 04:56:13PM -0800, enh wrote:
> > > int clock_nanosleep(clockid_t __clock, int __flags, const struct
> > > timespec* _Nonnull __time, struct timespec* _Nullable __remainder);
> >
> > Hmmmm, that's the best name, meaningfully, I think. But I've been
> > trying to avoid it. I don't like using names of standard functions in
> > identifiers; it might confuse. As an alternative, I thought of 't'.
> > What do you think?
>
> as you can see, i've taken the "the leading `__` means we get to
> trample whatever we like" approach :-)
>
> (we build bionic with hidden visibility and an explicit list of
> symbols for the linker to export, so we'd have to be trying quite hard
> to trip over ourselves.)

Yeah, I was worried about the manual page :)

--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
Looking for a remote C programming job at the moment.