Marc-Andre Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> added the comment: On 24.10.2017 11:23, STINNER Victor wrote: > > Marc-Andre Lemburg: "Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't know." > > Do you still think that we need to modify time.clock() rather than > deprecating it?
Yes, to avoid yet another Python 2/3 difference. It should be replaced with the appropriate variant on Windows and non-Windows platforms. From Serhiy's response that's time.process_time() on non-Windows platforms and time.perf_counter() on Windows. The documentation can point to the new functions and recommend these over time.clock(). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue31803> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
