> > But really ... why should the timeout attribute NOT become generally available?
>This
> > would simplify the interface, wouldn't it?
>
> It's more code to write. I prefer not to add features unless they are
> obvious or requested. Maybe this fits into the category of "obvious?"
I think so ;-) It has a general meaning, and it's more difficult to keep in mind which
watchers could be configured to time out and which cannot than to remember "ah, of
course, watchers have an timeout feature".
Thank you very much for the provided lists! They will be very helpful.
Jochen
