Re: [AD] yield_timeslice

[aj <aj@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> But is there any really valid argument apart from "the function doesn't do
> anymore what its name suggests it does"?



not that i can see,  i think the 4.1.13 behaviour is a behaviour that is 
needed, but i hope it does not remain under the name  yeild_timeslice().
id also like to repeat myself by saying "please dont sacrifice the future 
because of mistakes made in the past".


one argument i have heard is that  the new behaviour will do-its-thang  for 
already compiled apps, but just how many apps will be released on the 
4.1.13 lib built from old source code ?   surely we could remove the 
name  yeild_timeslice  so anyone re-compiling older source for the 4.1.13 
lib will be forced to change the source to either sleep_minimum_timeslice() 
[or whatever the new names are].

aj.