sleepy receiveTimeout?

[Joost 't Hart]

On 12/19/2010 09:56 AM, Nick Voronin wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2010 23:19:47 +0100
> Joost 't Hart<Joost.t.Hart at planet.nl>  wrote:
>
>> Quoting the documentation:
>>
>> /Suspends the calling thread for at least the supplied period./
>>
>> What does "at least" mean here? Is there also an "at most"? I do not
>> want my friend to end up in cyberspace. :-)
>
> Nope, there isn't :) In ordinary multitasking environment there is no guarantee on upper bound.
>

Surely got that bit, but I guess it makes sense to refer a bit more to 
some good old thread state names: After (exactly!) the given period of 
"suspension" the thread returns into "ready" state.
When (if ever) it will become the "running" thread again depends ...

Cheers,
Joost