Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mailrus!ncar!tank!mimsy!chris
From: chris@mimsy.umd.edu (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Re^2: sleep()ing less than a second
Message-ID: <21515@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 28 Dec 89 19:16:35 GMT
References: <89348.231211BACON@MTUS5.BITNET> <2754@servax0.essex.ac.uk> <1989Dec28.091551.17731@eng.umd.edu>
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 18

(This is not C, but rather Unix; followups redirected there.)

>In article <107@mosh.UUCP> rolff@mosh.UUCP (Anders Rolff) writes:
>>>select(...) with an appropriate value in the timeval

In article <1989Dec28.091551.17731@eng.umd.edu> dskim@eng.umd.edu
(Daeshik Kim) writes:
>Why not 'setitimer' ?

select() is simpler.  To use setitimer(ITIMER_REAL) properly, you have
to do much more work.  (If you use it improperly, your program will
eventually fail.)

The only disadvantage to select over setitimer(ITIMER_REAL) is that
it is interrupted by signals.  This may be an advantage in some cases.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris@cs.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris