On 17Apr2012 08:35, R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> wrote: | On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:48:22 +1000, Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au> wrote: | > On 16Apr2012 01:25, Victor Stinner <victor.stin...@gmail.com> wrote: | > | I suppose that most people don't care that "resolution" and | > | "precision" are different things. | > | > If we're using the same definitions we discussed offline, where | > | > - resolution is the units the clock call (underneath) works in (for | > example, nanoseconds) | > | > - precision is the effective precision of the results, for example | > milliseconds | > | > I'd say people would care if they knew, and mostly care about | > "precision". | | I think what the user cares about is "what is the smallest tick that | this clock result will faithfully represent?".
That is what "precision" is supposed to mean above. I suspect we're all in agreement here about its purpose. | To use other words, what the users cares about are the error bars on | the returned result. Yes. And your discussion about the hw clock exceeding the API resulution means we mean "the error bars as they escape from the OS API". I still think we're all in agreement about the meaning here. -- Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au> DoD#743 http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/ Often the good of the many is worth more than the good of the few. Saying "if they have saved one life then they are worthwhile" places the good of the few above the good of the many and past a certain threshold that's a reprehensible attitude, for which I have utter contempt. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
