[Python-Dev] PEP 418 is too divisive and confusing and should be postponed (original) (raw)

Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Wed Apr 4 11:52:24 CEST 2012

On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 18:09:40 +1000 Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:

> Python 3.3 has already time.clockgettime() and time.clockgetres() with > CLOCKREALTIME, CLOCKMONOTONIC, CLOCKMONOTONICRAW, CLOCKHIGHRES.

Why does it already have these things when the PEP is not accepted? (This is not a rhetorical question, perhaps there is a good reason why these have been added independently of the PEP.)

Because these are thin (low-level) wrappers around the corresponding POSIX APIs, so there is no reason not to add them.

I know you were asking for such wrappers to be in the "os" module, but my understanding is that time-related functions should preferably go into the "time" module. "os" is already full of very diverse stuff, and documentation-wise it is better if time-related functions end up in a time-related module. Otherwise we'll end up having to cross-link manually, which is always cumbersome (for us) and less practical (for the reader).

Regards

Antoine.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list