Creating timers using the functions :erlang.send_after/3 and :erlang.start_timer/3 is much more efficient than using the timers provided by the :timer module.
Can you elaborate why this is? Feels like a place where the less efficient version should be made an alias to the more efficient one unless there’s some good reason to keep the less efficient one.
I think it because the :timer module is old and maybe predates the timer functions in the :erlang module. Originally it was a server running which managed all the timer requests and kept track of when to send messages and to whom. Now it has been heavily optimised and itself uses the timer functions n the :erlang module when it can so it is generally less efficient than calling the function directly. That would be one reason why it is still used in many examples. Also some of the functions like tc need some wrapping to get the same results.
EDIT: What I meant to say is that using :timer is generally almost as efficient as calling the timer functions directly. There is only a very small difference.