Author vstinner
Recipients belopolsky, benhoyt, benjamin.peterson, ethan.furman, fdrake, lemburg, mrabarnett, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner
Date 2017-10-18.08:28:00
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1508315280.52.0.213398074469.issue31803@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Marc Andre Lemburg: "time.cock() is used in a lot of code. Why can't we simply replace the functionality with one of the other functions ? The documentation certainly allows for such a change, since it pretty much just says that only the delta between two values has a meaning."

Currently time.clock() is the same clock than time.perf_counter() on Windows, but it's closer to CPU time as time.process_time() on Unix.

time.perf_counter() and time.process_time() have a different name because the they are different clocks and don't measure the same thing. The main obvious difference is that time.process_time() doesn't include time elapsed during sleep.

>>> import time
>>> c1=time.perf_counter(); p1=time.process_time(); time.sleep(1); c2=time.perf_counter(); p2=time.process_time()
>>> c2-c1, p2-p1
(1.0010841980038094, 7.308599999999998e-05)

I don't see how to modify clock() to make it behave the same on Windows and Unix without breaking any application which relies on the current clock() behaviour.
History
Date User Action Args
2017-10-18 08:28:00vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, lemburg, fdrake, belopolsky, benjamin.peterson, mrabarnett, benhoyt, ethan.furman, serhiy.storchaka
2017-10-18 08:28:00vstinnersetmessageid: <1508315280.52.0.213398074469.issue31803@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2017-10-18 08:28:00vstinnerlinkissue31803 messages
2017-10-18 08:28:00vstinnercreate