Author qopit
Recipients
Date 2006-06-27.20:01:01
SpamBayes Score
Marked as misclassified
Message-id
In-reply-to
Content
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1542586

No - just stating that clock() is definitely a better
solution for win32.

As you say, any system should just use a time-indpendent
uptime counter that is as high resolution as possible.  I
don't know how to get this on linux, but I do seem to recall
that, on linux, time() is higher resolution than clock() for
some reason.

If linux has no performance counter equivalent (isn't it a
hardware thing anyway?) I have no clue which is worse... low
resolution, or local time change issues.  The first is
limiting all the time, the second results in wacky and
sporadic errors that people might not expect.
History
Date User Action Args
2007-08-23 14:40:42adminlinkissue1508864 messages
2007-08-23 14:40:42admincreate