Consistent naming for event loop implementations #128
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@clue Tests are failing :) |
|
@jsor Indeed, small oversight for timer tests, PR updated |
jsor
approved these changes
Dec 4, 2017
This was referenced Dec 4, 2017
This was referenced Dec 22, 2017
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This simple PR ensure we use a consistent naming scheme for all event loop implementations.
LibEventLooptoExtLibeventLoop(ext-libevent) andLibEvLooptoExtLibevLoop(ext-libev),ExtEventLoop(ext-event),StreamSelectLoop(does not require an extension).Resolves / closes #115
Builds on top of #127