On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 07:02:13 -0700 > Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: >> > >> > It is this function: >> > http://docs.python.org/dev/library/time.html#time.clock_gettime >> > >> > It's just a binding of the C function clock_gettime(). Should the PEP >> > describe all functions used by the PEP? >> >> Oh, now I'm confused. Se in 3.3 we're adding a bunch of other new >> functions to the time module that aren't described by the PEP? Aren't >> those functions redundant? Or did I miss some part of the conversation >> where this was discussed? What's *their* history? > > time.clock_gettime() (and the related constants > CLOCK_{REALTIME,MONOTONIC, etc.}) is a thin wrapper around the > corresponding POSIX function, it's there for people who want low-level > control over their choice of APIs: > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/clock_gettime.html > > As a thin wrapper, adding it to the time module was pretty much > uncontroversial, I think. The PEP proposes cross-platform > functions with consistent semantics, which is where a discussion was > needed.
True, but does this mean clock_gettime and friends only exist on POSIX? Shouldn't they be in the os or posix module then? I guess I'm fine with either place but I don't know if enough thought was put into the decision. Up until now the time module had only cross-platform functions (even if clock()'s semantics vary widely). -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) _______________________________________________ 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
