John Machin wrote:
> AFAICT that was enough indication for most people to use time.clock on
> all platforms ...
which was unfortunate, given that time.clock() isn't even a proper clock
on most Unix systems; it's a low-resolution sample counter that can
happily assign all time to a process that uses, say, 2% CPU and zero
time to one that uses 98% CPU.
> before the introduction of the timeit module; have you considered it?
whether or not "timeit" suites his requirements, he can at least replace
his code with
clock = timeit.default_timer
which returns a good wall-time clock (which happens to be time.time() on
Unix and time.clock() on Windows).
</F>
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
