This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author lemburg
Recipients belopolsky, benhoyt, benjamin.peterson, ethan.furman, fdrake, lemburg, mrabarnett, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner
Date 2017-10-24.20:40:58
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
In-reply-to <>
On 24.10.2017 11:23, STINNER Victor wrote:
> Marc-Andre Lemburg: "Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't know."
> Do you still think that we need to modify time.clock() rather than deprecating it?

Yes, to avoid yet another Python 2/3 difference. It should be
replaced with the appropriate variant on Windows
and non-Windows platforms. From Serhiy's response that's
time.process_time() on non-Windows platforms and time.perf_counter()
on Windows.

The documentation can point to the new functions and recommend
these over time.clock().
Date User Action Args
2017-10-24 20:40:58lemburgsetrecipients: + lemburg, fdrake, belopolsky, vstinner, benjamin.peterson, mrabarnett, benhoyt, ethan.furman, serhiy.storchaka
2017-10-24 20:40:58lemburglinkissue31803 messages
2017-10-24 20:40:58lemburgcreate