RE: ANN: sleep() patch for Lua 4.0

["Eric Ries" <eries@...>]

I vote for yield() as it seems to describe what is going on precisely.

Eric

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lua-l@tecgraf.puc-rio.br
> [mailto:owner-lua-l@tecgraf.puc-rio.br]On Behalf Of Thatcher Ulrich
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 2:50 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Re: ANN: sleep() patch for Lua 4.0
> 
> 
> On Dec 10, 2001 at 04:31 -0600, jim@mathies.com wrote:
> > you might consider changing "sleep()" to something else like 
> "lsleep()" or
> > similar? people might confuse if for the real "sleep( millisec )" call.
> 
> Do you mean the "Sleep(millis)" Win32 API?  There's also the "sleep"
> Unix shell command, which shows up in Perl et al (but takes seconds,
> not milliseconds).
> 
> I don't have a strong attachment to "sleep()"; I got the impression
> from the list archives that it would be a commonly understood name for
> this functionality.  Another possibility is "yield()".  ET's coroutine
> library uses "co_resume()", if I understand the man page correctly,
> but I think that might be confusing (especially so, when mixed with a
> Lua binding to ET's library...).  "lsleep()" is slightly cryptic IMO,
> but maybe it's justified for avoiding confusion.
> 
> Anybody else with naming opinions, feel free to let me know.  If the
> Lua authors might consider adopting this functionality in the core
> Lua, then whatever name they like is also the one I like :)
> 
> -- 
> Thatcher Ulrich <tu@tulrich.com>
> http://tulrich.com
>