Georg Brandl wrote:
On 28.03.2012 06:45, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Victor Stinner
<victor.stin...@gmail.com> wrote:
If QueryPerformanceCounter() is monotonic, the API can be simplified to:
* time.time() = system clock
* time.monotonic() = monotonic clock
* time.hires() = monotonic clock or fallback to system clock
time.hires() definition is exactly what I was trying to implement with
"time.steady(strict=True)" / "time.try_monotonic()".
Please don't call the fallback version "hires" as it suggests it may
be higher resolution than time.time() and that's completely the wrong
idea.
It's also a completely ugly name, since it's quite hard to figure out
what it is supposed to stand for in the first place.
Precisely. I always read "hires" as the verb hires (as in "he hires a car to
go on holiday") rather than HIgh RESolution.
-1 on hires, it's a horrible name. And misleading as well, because on Linux,
it isn't any more high res than time.time().
+1 on Nick's suggestion of try_monotonic. It is clear and obvious and doesn't
mislead.
I don't have an opinion as to what the implementation of try_monotonic should
be. Whether it should fall back to time.time, time.clock, or something else, I
don't know. But it is a clear and obvious solution for the use-case of "I
prefer the monotonic clock, if it is available, otherwise I'll take my chances
with a best-effect clock."
--
Steven
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
