> My thinking was that C<nice> requires less
> knowledge of internals than C<prio>. With C<nice>, I can think about
> increasing or decreasing priority without worrying about the exact
> numeric priority.
In my opinion, this is true if you have a certain watcher running and want to change
its priority. Then it's simpler to say: "more important" or "less important" (than
before), I agree. But if you start with a set of different watchers for various
purposes, you need a hierarchy with EXPLICIT priorities.
> Perhaps the documentation can be changes to:
>
> Unless you are a sophisticated user, do not specify prio in the
> constructor. Use C<nice> instead for an offset from the default
> priority.
I would prefer something like
"
Each watcher comes with an I<default priority>, which is set automatically by its
constructor unless you specify either the C<prio> or C<nice> attribute. These
default priorities are
<table of default priorities>
Use C<prio> to explicitly assign a priority of your choice, or C<nice> to specify an
offset to the current priority value. If I<both> C<prio> and C<nice> are specified
in the constructor, C<nice> is ignored silently.
"
Jochen
