[TIP] Result protocol / problems being solved

Scott David Daniels Scott.Daniels at Acm.Org
Tue Apr 14 09:58:04 PDT 2009

Mark Sienkiewicz wrote:
> Scott David Daniels wrote:
>> On Windows, time.clock() has higher precision than time.time()
>> It returns ime in seconds (so is in some sense compatible), but uses a 
>> counter
>> that doesn't get time adjustment the way the date & time-of-day do
>> (time.time() has better synchronization with the atomic clock, but at
>> the cost of local adjustments.  If your timing interval covers one of those
>> adjustments, the timing on that measurement will be mis-measured (and
>> may even be negative). 
> Wait a minute --- the only way I can see that it could be negative is if 
> stop_time < start_time.  Are you saying that time can actually run 
> _backwards_ on Windows?
I think it can, but don't have a verified sighting to guarantee so.  I 
have in the past had timing
messed up in a way that led me to unplug the internet for certain 
measurements.  And a big
":-)" to jnoller for his comment.

--Scott David Daniels
Scott.Daniels at Acm.Org

More information about the testing-in-python mailing list