On Thu Feb 20 21:50:43 2025 +0000, Rémi Bernon wrote:
Ah no, that's IMO a bit ugly. I meant rather something like that:
static struct timespec *get_next_timeout_ts( struct timespec *ts ) { /* ... */ if (next_timeout == -1) return NULL; ts->tv_sec = next_timeout / 10000000; ts->tv_nsec = (next_timeout % 10000000) * 100; return ts; }
I don't have enough experience to prefer either, but this looks good too, so I will change that.