[PATCH 2/2] rtems: Add more clock tick functions

[Joel Sherrill]

On August 24, 2014 7:28:32 AM EDT, Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org> wrote:
>On 24/08/2014 6:57 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 08/24/2014 05:02 AM, Chris Johns wrote:
>>>
>>> The calls names make sense from a programming point of view but from
>a
>>> user point of view they are sort of forwards and backwards. For
>>> example rtems_clock_ticks_later_us is the "the clock tick so many
>>> micro-seconds later where later implies now" or
>>> 'rtems_clock_tick_usecs_later' and following this I suppose
>>> 'rtems_clock_ticks_later' becomes 'rtems_clock_tick_ticks_later' ?
>>
>> What about rtems_clock_tick_later() and rtems_clock_tick_before()? In
>> the context it should be clear what they do, e.g.
>>
>
>Fine.

Would initiate/finalize or begin/end have more meaning?

We used to have rtems_initialize_early and late and they were hard to explain. These seem to bracket a series of operations rather than to be a multiple stage process.

>Chris
>_______________________________________________
>devel mailing list
>devel at rtems.org
>http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel