Grant Edwards wrote: >> You can get better resolution by using time.clock() instead of >> time.time(). > > Oh really? When I do it, time.clock() is worse:
on Unix, time.clock() is a tick counter; if your process is running when the tick interrupt arrives, the internal counter value is incremented (whether the process actually used the full tick slot or not). the tick resolution is usually 1-10 milli- seconds. on Windows, time.clock() is a high-resolution CPU counter, with microsecond resolution. </F> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
