> The descriptions should really stress the scope of the result's > validity. My guess (or wish :-)) would be: > > - time.monotonic(): system-wide results, comparable from one process to > another > - time.perf_counter(): process-wide results, comparable from one thread > to another (?) > - time.process_time(): process-wide, by definition
time.monotonic() and time.perf_counter() are process-wide on Windows older than Vista because of GetTickCount() overflow, on other OSes, they are system-wide. > It would also be nice to know if some systems may be unable to > implement time.monotonic(). You can find such information in the following section: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0418/#clock-monotonic-clock-monotonic-raw-clock-boottime All OSes provide a monotonic clock, except GNU/Hurd. You mean that it should be mentioned in the time.monotonic() section? >> GetTickCount() has an precision of 55 ms on Windows 9x. > > Do we care? :) Precision under recent Windows variants (XP or later) > would be more useful. You can get the precision on Windows Seven in the following table: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0418/#monotonic-clocks I will move the precision of monotonic clock of Windows 9x info into this table. Victor _______________________________________________ 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
