[Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?
Nadeem Vawda
nadeem.vawda at gmail.com
Wed Mar 14 02:10:46 CET 2012
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Wed Mar 14 02:10:46 CET 2012
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Victor Stinner <victor.stinner at gmail.com> wrote: > I suppose that most libraries and programs will have to implement a > similar fallback. > > We may merge both functions with a flag to be able to disable the > fallback. Example: > > - time.realtime(): best-effort monotonic, with a fallback > - time.realtime(monotonic=True): monotonic, may raise OSError or > NotImplementedError This was my suggestion - I think it's useful to have the fallback available (since most users will want it), but at the same time we should also cater to users who need a clock that is *guaranteed* to be monotonic. As an aside, I think "monotonic" is a better name than "realtime"; it conveys the functions purpose more clearly. Then we could call the flag "strict". Cheers, Nadeem
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list