homepage

> > I've always had an implicit understanding that calls with timeouts may,
> > for whatever reason, return sooner than requested (or later!), and the
> > most careful approach is to re-check the clock again.
> 
> I've always had the implicit understanding that if I use an *infinite*
> timeout then the call will not timeout.
Wow, that's a good point. select() and friends are not documented to
exhibit successful spurious wakeups. It would be a pretty strong
compatibility breach if they started doing so.
If we don't want select() to silently retry on EINTR, then I think we
should leave it alone.
Speaking of which, I see that SelectSelector.select() returns an empty
list when interrupted, but this is nowhere documented.