RetroSearch Browse

Wed Mar 14 02:10:46 CET 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-March/117581.html

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Victor Stinner
<victor.stinner at gmail.com> wrote:
> I suppose that most libraries and programs will have to implement a
> similar fallback.
>
> We may merge both functions with a flag to be able to disable the
> fallback. Example:
>
>  - time.realtime(): best-effort monotonic, with a fallback
>  - time.realtime(monotonic=True): monotonic, may raise OSError or
> NotImplementedError

This was my suggestion - I think it's useful to have the fallback
available (since most users will want it), but at the same time we
should also cater to users who need a clock that is *guaranteed* to
be monotonic.

As an aside, I think "monotonic" is a better name than "realtime";
it conveys the functions purpose more clearly. Then we could call
the flag "strict".

Cheers,
Nadeem

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-March/117581.html below:

[Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?