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 <franci...@email.de> wrote: > 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 nanosecond ** > > ** no need for resolution better than 1 nanosecond in practive in the > Python standard library.** > > practice vs practice > > > > If I understood you correctly on Python-ideas (here just for the > records, otherwise please ignore it): > > why not something like (please change '_in' for what you like): > > time.time_in(precision) > time.monotonic_in(precision) > > > where precision is an enumeration for: 'seconds', 'milliseconds' > 'microseconds'... (or 's', 'ms', 'us', 'ns', ...) > > > Thanks, > --francis > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ > guido%40python.org > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
