Jim J. Jewett jimjjewett at gmail.com
Tue Mar 20 04:51:35 CET 2012

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] cpython: Issue #10278: Add an optional strict argument to time.steady(), False by default
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Issue #10278 -- why not just an attribute?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

In http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-March/117762.html
Georg Brandl posted:

>> +   If available, a monotonic clock is used. By default, if *strict* is False,
>> +   the function falls back to another clock if the monotonic clock failed or is
>> +   not available. If *strict* is True, raise an :exc:`OSError` on error or
>> +   :exc:`NotImplementedError` if no monotonic clock is available.

> This is not clear to me.  Why wouldn't it raise OSError on error even with
> strict=False?  Please clarify which exception is raised in which case.

Passing strict as an argument seems like overkill since it will always
be meaningless on some (most?) platforms.  Why not just use a function
attribute?  Those few users who do care can check the value of
time.steady.monotonic before calling time.steady(); exceptions raised
will always be whatever the clock actually raises.

-jJ

-- 

If there are still threading problems with my replies, please 
email me with details, so that I can try to resolve them.  -jJ

---

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] cpython: Issue #10278: Add an optional strict argument to time.steady(), False by default
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Issue #10278 -- why not just an attribute?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list