Yes, it should be possible - .NET provides us the Stopwatch class for this reason in 2.0. I've opened a beta 7 bug for this.
Do you want to help develop Dynamic languages on CLR? (http://members.microsoft.com/careers/search/details.aspx?JobID=6D4754DE-11F0-45DF-8B78-DC1B43134038) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Foord Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 2:10 AM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: [IronPython] time module Hello all, I was surprised to note that the IronPython module provides dramatically less resolution than the cPython equivalent. Both ``time.time()`` and ``time.clock()`` provide a resolution of only tenths of a second. This module is obviously heavily dependent on the underlying platform. In fact the standard Python docs warn, of ``time.time`` : Return the time as a floating point number expressed in seconds since the epoch, in UTC. Note that even though the time is always returned as a floating point number, not all systems provide time with a better precision than 1 second. While this function normally returns non-decreasing values, it can return a lower value than a previous call if the system clock has been set back between the two calls. *However*, of ``time.clock()``, the docs say : On Unix, return the current processor time as a floating point number expressed in seconds. The precision, and in fact the very definition of the meaning of ``processor time'', depends on that of the C function of the same name, but in any case, this is the function to use for benchmarking Python or timing algorithms. On Windows, this function returns wall-clock seconds elapsed since the first call to this function, as a floating point number, based on the Win32 function QueryPerformanceCounter(). The resolution is typically better than one microsecond. This means that ``time.clock()`` no longer functions usefully, or as described in the docs. For our profiling we started to use ``System.DateTime.Now``, but discovered this had a resolution of about 15ms. This was too small an increment for measuring some of our recursive functions. We ended up using ``QueryPerformanceCounter`` from C# [#]_. Would it be possible to re-implement ``time.clock`` so that it is useful ? Michael Foord .. [#] See the following page for basically full code to do this, http://www.codeproject.com/csharp/highperformancetimercshar.asp _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
