Scott Cheloha <[email protected]> wrote: > FWIW, the manpage has literally always led with this bolded > implementation detail. From January of 1986: > > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/csrg/lib/libc/gen/ualarm.3?revision=25789&view=markup
I'm just saying it is uninformative and distracting. > ... specifically, setitimer(2) can handle huge intervals that, when > converted to a count of microseconds, will overflow ualarm's return > value. So using both interfaces in the same program is error-prone. > There's no good reason to do so, and we should discourage programmers > from doing so unambiguously. In short words: "don't intermix".
