On 22 October 2017 at 09:32, Victor Stinner
wrote:
> Le 21 oct. 2017 20:31, "francismb" a écrit :
>
> I understand that one can just multiply/divide the nanoseconds returned,
> (or it could be a factory) but wouldn't it help for future enhancements
> to reduce the number of functions (the 'pico'
Le 21 oct. 2017 20:31, "francismb" a écrit :
I understand that one can just multiply/divide the nanoseconds returned,
(or it could be a factory) but wouldn't it help for future enhancements
to reduce the number of functions (the 'pico' question)?
If you are me to predict the future, I predict t
If it sounds as there is no need or is unnecessary to you then
it its ok :-), thank you for the feedback ! I'm just curious on:
On 10/21/2017 05:45 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> That sounds like unnecessary generality,
Meaning that the selection of precision on running time 'costs'?
I understand
That sounds like unnecessary generality, and also suggests that the API
might support precisions way beyond what is realistic.
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 4:39 AM, francismb wrote:
> Hi Victor,
>
> On 10/18/2017 01:14 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> > I updated my PEP 564 to add time.process_time_ns():
Hi Victor,
On 10/18/2017 01:14 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> I updated my PEP 564 to add time.process_time_ns():
> https://github.com/python/peps/blob/master/pep-0564.rst
>
> The HTML version should be updated shortly:
> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0564/
** In practive, the resolution of 1
