Re: ANN: sleep() patch for Lua 4.0

[jim@...]

ditto - i like yield too. nice library by the way. :)

Regards,
Jim


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eric Ries" <eries@there.com>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <lua-l@tecgraf.puc-rio.br>
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 4:52 PM
Subject: RE: ANN: sleep() patch for Lua 4.0


| 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
| > 
| 
|