https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13433
--- Comment #13 from Steven Schveighoffer <schvei...@yahoo.com> --- (In reply to Jonathan M Davis from comment #12) > As I said, I'm not against adding it. It just seems to me that in most cases > where you'd be getting the time that quickly, it wouldn't make sense to only > have a resolution of 1 ms. Precision vs. speed of retrieval is a reasonable tradeoff which I find quite natural. Think of a printer's fast draft vs. best quality -- I can think of reasons where you would want both. The most obvious application is logging: you want logging to be very very light CPU time-wise, and the time of the log doesn't have to be generally precise (but it should be accurate). In fact, a log can do without time outputs if necessary -- the most important aspect is the order of the log. The time between two log messages is really a secondary concern. I think it should be added as an option. In regards to Windows or Mac options, I think it's OK to just return the same thing as a normal call at this point until we can find another possibility. The optional parameter can mean "use fastest retrieval mechanism even if it's less precise" which would be true if there's only one mechanism :) --