RetroSearch Browse

Tue Apr 17 14:35:44 CEST 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-April/118809.html

On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:48:22 +1000, Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au> wrote:
> On 16Apr2012 01:25, Victor Stinner <victor.stinner at gmail.com> wrote:
> | I suppose that most people don't care that "resolution" and
> | "precision" are different things.
> 
> If we're using the same definitions we discussed offline, where
> 
>   - resolution is the units the clock call (underneath) works in (for
>     example, nanoseconds)
> 
>   - precision is the effective precision of the results, for example
>     milliseconds
> 
> I'd say people would care if they knew, and mostly care about
> "precision".

I think what the user cares about is "what is the smallest tick that
this clock result will faithfully represent?".  If the number of bits
returned is larger than the clock accuracy, you want the clock accuracy.
If the number of bits returned is smaller than the clock accuracy,
you want the number of bits.

(Yes, I'm using accuracy in a slightly different sense here...I think
we don't have the right words for this.)

To use other words, what the users cares about are the error bars on
the returned result.

--David

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-April/118809.html below:

Add monotonic time, performance counter and process time functions