On 01.05.2012 10:35, Victor Stinner wrote:

...

...

diff --git a/Lib/timeit.py b/Lib/timeit.py --- a/Lib/timeit.py +++ b/Lib/timeit.py @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ -n/--number N: how many times to execute 'statement' (default: see below) -r/--repeat N: how many times to repeat the timer (default 3) -s/--setup S: statement to be executed once initially (default 'pass') - -t/--time: use time.time() (default on Unix) - -c/--clock: use time.clock() (default on Windows) + -t/--time: use time.time() + -c/--clock: use time.clock()

Does it make sense to keep the options this way? IMO the distinction should be to use either perf_counter() or process_time(), and the options could implement this (-t -> perf_counter, -c -> process_time).

You might need to use exactly the same clock to compare performance of Python 3.2 and 3.3.

Adding an option to use time.process_time() is a good idea. Is anyone interested to implement it?

I implemented it in d43a8aa9dbef. I also updated the docs in 552c207f65e4. Georg

On 01.05.2012 10:35, Victor Stinner wrote:

...

...

diff --git a/Lib/timeit.py b/Lib/timeit.py --- a/Lib/timeit.py +++ b/Lib/timeit.py @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ -n/--number N: how many times to execute 'statement' (default: see below) -r/--repeat N: how many times to repeat the timer (default 3) -s/--setup S: statement to be executed once initially (default 'pass') - -t/--time: use time.time() (default on Unix) - -c/--clock: use time.clock() (default on Windows) + -t/--time: use time.time() + -c/--clock: use time.clock()

Does it make sense to keep the options this way? IMO the distinction should be to use either perf_counter() or process_time(), and the options could implement this (-t -> perf_counter, -c -> process_time).

You might need to use exactly the same clock to compare performance of Python 3.2 and 3.3.

Adding an option to use time.process_time() is a good idea. Is anyone interested to implement it?

I implemented it in d43a8aa9dbef. I also updated the docs in 552c207f65e4. Georg