Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-April/118608.html below:

[Python-Dev] this is why we shouldn't call it a "monotonic clock" (was: PEP 418 is too divisive and confusing and should be postponed)

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] this is why we shouldn't call it a "monotonic clock" (was: PEP 418 is too divisive and confusing and should be postponed)
• Next message: [Python-Dev] this is why we shouldn't call it a "monotonic clock" (was: PEP 418 is too divisive and confusing and should be postponed)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Sun, 8 Apr 2012 07:29:30 -0700
Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> 
> What to name it can't be decided this way, although I might put
> forward time.sleeptimer().

interval_timer() ?
I would suggest timer() simply, but it's too close to time().

> I personally have a need for one potentially different clock -- to
> measure short intervals for benchmarks and profiling. This might be
> called time.performancetimer()?

It's called perf_counter() in the PEP:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0418/#deferred-api-time-perf-counter

Regards

Antoine.

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] this is why we shouldn't call it a "monotonic clock" (was: PEP 418 is too divisive and confusing and should be postponed)
• Next message: [Python-Dev] this is why we shouldn't call it a "monotonic clock" (was: PEP 418 is too divisive and confusing and should be postponed)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4