On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 10:53:10PM +0100, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2014-01-27 22:47, Simon King wrote:
> >Has there
> >been a deprecation warning when using alarm() with an argument that is
> >equal to zero?
> No. But as John says, alarm(0) was never documented, nor did it
> appear in any doctest
On 2014-01-27 22:47, Simon King wrote:
Has there
been a deprecation warning when using alarm() with an argument that is
equal to zero?
No. But as John says, alarm(0) was never documented, nor did it appear
in any doctest.
Would it be a problem to allow alarm(0) but disallow alarm(0.0)?
--
You
Hi John,
On 2014-01-27, John H Palmieri wrote:
> Second, the old alarm code happened to work the way you wanted, but it
> wasn't documented that way, and it's not clear (to me, at least) that that
> use was ever intended. Had it been documented, or had it been commonly
> known that alarm(0) wa
