[Python-Dev] A couple of PEP 418 comments
Hello, I'm just starting a new thread since the old ones are so crowded. First, overall I think the PEP is starting to look really good and insightful! (congratulations to Victor) I have a couple of comments, mostly small ones: function (str): name of the underlying operating system function. I think implementation is a better name here (more precise, and perhaps also more accurate :-)). time.monotonic() time.perf_counter() time.process_time() 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 It would also be nice to know if some systems may be unable to implement time.monotonic(). 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. Is there a designated dictator for this PEP? Regards Antoine. ___ 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
Re: [Python-Dev] A couple of PEP 418 comments
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
Re: [Python-Dev] A couple of PEP 418 comments
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:29, Victor Stinner I will move the precision of monotonic clock of Windows 9x info into this table. I would just remove it entirely. It's not relevant since it's not supported. ___ 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
Re: [Python-Dev] A couple of PEP 418 comments
On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 18:29:10 +0200 Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote: 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. Perhaps, but you should say in the PEP, not here ;-) By the way, I wonder if it may be a problem if monotonic() is process-wide under Windows. All OSes provide a monotonic clock, except GNU/Hurd. You mean that it should be mentioned in the time.monotonic() section? Yes, that would be clearer. Regards Antoine. ___ 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
