Resuming the great cleanup

[Hal Murray]

>> Is there a better term than alarm?  The normal case will be to
>> wait for a packet to arrive with a N second timeout.  That's just
>> a timeout on a poll.

> I use 'alarm' because I think of it as what alarm(2) does.  I'm not wedded
> to that term. 

alarm(2) uses a signal.  I think of that as ugly overhead.  But on the other 
hand, if it's at most once per second that's not a big deal.  If it actually 
makes the code cleaner, we should do it that way.

-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.