On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 10:31:17AM +0000, Taylor R Campbell wrote: > I don't see why that wouldn't work: you're just ignoring the update of > timeout and repeating the bookkeeping yourself.
Hmm, right. Lucky for the people who do the mechanical conversion without thinking, which was my point. I couldn't think of better name yesterday. How about cv_boundedwaitns to emphasize that this puts an upper bound on the wait time? That could als serve as a reminder to use the new idiom that you've made possible. --chris
