On 22 October 2017 at 09:32, Victor Stinner
wrote:
> Le 21 oct. 2017 20:31, "francismb" a écrit :
>
> I understand that one can just multiply/divide the nanoseconds returned,
> (or it could be a factory) but wouldn't it help for future enhancements
Le 21 oct. 2017 20:31, "francismb" a écrit :
I understand that one can just multiply/divide the nanoseconds returned,
(or it could be a factory) but wouldn't it help for future enhancements
to reduce the number of functions (the 'pico' question)?
If you are me to predict
If it sounds as there is no need or is unnecessary to you then
it its ok :-), thank you for the feedback ! I'm just curious on:
On 10/21/2017 05:45 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> That sounds like unnecessary generality,
Meaning that the selection of precision on running time 'costs'?
I
That sounds like unnecessary generality, and also suggests that the API
might support precisions way beyond what is realistic.
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 4:39 AM, francismb wrote:
> Hi Victor,
>
> On 10/18/2017 01:14 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> > I updated my PEP 564 to add
Hi Victor,
On 10/18/2017 01:14 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> I updated my PEP 564 to add time.process_time_ns():
> https://github.com/python/peps/blob/master/pep-0564.rst
>
> The HTML version should be updated shortly:
> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0564/
** In practive, the resolution of