28 Mar
2012
28 Mar
'12
10:56 a.m.
In that case, I don't think time.try_monotonic() is really needed because we can emulate "time.monotonic()" in software if the platform is deficient.
As I wrote, I don't think that Python should workaround OS bugs. If the OS monotonic clock is not monotonic, the OS should be fixed.
I sympathize with this, but if the idea is that the Python stdlib should use time.monotonic() for scheduling, then it needs to always be available. Otherwise, we are not going to use it ourselves, and what sort of example is that to set?
There is time.hires() if you need a monotonic clock with a fallback to the system clock. Victor