[Python-Dev] Use QueryPerformanceCounter() for time.monotonic() and/or time.highres()? (original) (raw)
Stephen J. Turnbull stephen at xemacs.org
Mon Apr 2 04🔞04 CEST 2012
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] this is why we shouldn't call it a "monotonic clock" (was: PEP 418 is too divisive and confusing and should be postponed)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] .{git,bzr}ignore in cpython HG repo
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
Given the amount of disagreement I sense, I think we'll need to wait for more people to chime in.
I currently can't imagine why I personally would want anything better than what we currently call time.time. For that reason, I like Cameron's proposal best. If and when I have a use case, I'll be able to query the system for the clock that has the best combination of desirable properties. Admittedly, by then the answer probably will be "time.time."
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] this is why we shouldn't call it a "monotonic clock" (was: PEP 418 is too divisive and confusing and should be postponed)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] .{git,bzr}ignore in cpython HG repo
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]