[Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?
yselivanov.ml at gmail.com
Fri Mar 23 23:56:08 CET 2012
On 2012-03-23, at 1:27 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> I want time.steady(strict=True), and I'm glad you're providing it and
>> I'm willing to use it this way, although it is slightly annoying
>> because "time.steady(strict=True)" really means
>> "time.steady(i_really_mean_it=True)". Else, I would have used
>> I am aware of a large number of use cases for a steady clock (event
>> scheduling, profiling, timeouts), and a large number of uses cases for
>> a "NTP-respecting wall clock" clock (calendaring, displaying to a
>> user, timestamping). I'm not aware of any use case for "steady if
>> implemented, else wall-clock", and it sounds like a mistake to me.
> time.steady(strict=False) is what you need to implement timeout.
> If you use time.steady(strict=True) for timeout, it means that you
> cannot use select, threads, etc. if your platform doesn't provide
> monotonic clock, whereas it works "well" (except the issue of adjusted
> time) with Python < 3.3.
Why can't I use select & threads? You mean that if a platform does not
support monotonic clocks it also does not support threads and select sys
More information about the Python-Dev