On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 09:46:30 -0600, Scott Cheloha wrote:

> I want to avoid giving the reader even the slightest impression that
> the return value from times(3) can be used for anything but real-time
> interval measurement.  Mentioning that the value is relative to the
> system start time seems to lean in that direction.  What did you want
> to impart by documenting that?

That's reasonable.  My only concern is that by using the word
"arbitrary" it becomes unclear whether the returned time is consistent
between calls.  I'm not sure how best to get that across.  Maybe
it is not really important since this is a deprecated interface.

 - todd

Reply via email to