Russell King <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> rmk, also a native English speaker, agrees with Ray, Thomas and Ingo.
> As does dictionary.reference.com's definitions of timeout and timer:
>
> timeout
>
> A period of time after which an error condition is raised if some event
> has not occured. A common example is sending a message. If the receiver
> does not acknowledge the message within some preset timeout period, a
> transmission error is assumed to have occured.
>
> timer
>
> a timepiece that measures a time interval and signals its end
>
> Hence, timers have the implication that they are _expected_ to expire.
> Timeouts have the implication that their expiry is an exceptional
> condition.
Well timer_lists get around the problem quite neatly by handling both
situations. In a way which has been learned by thousands of developers
over many years.
The whole concept of separating "timers" from "timeouts" seems a step
backward to me. A large one. Why was it done, and can it be undone?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
