Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Python: Dev
Issue #10278 -- why not just an attribute?

Index | Next | Previous | View Flat

jimjjewett at gmail

Mar 19, 2012, 8:51 PM

Views: 322
Issue #10278 -- why not just an attribute?

In http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-March/117762.html
Georg Brandl posted:

>> + If available, a monotonic clock is used. By default, if *strict* is False,
>> + the function falls back to another clock if the monotonic clock failed or is
>> + not available. If *strict* is True, raise an :exc:`OSError` on error or
>> + :exc:`NotImplementedError` if no monotonic clock is available.

> This is not clear to me. Why wouldn't it raise OSError on error even with
> strict=False? Please clarify which exception is raised in which case.

Passing strict as an argument seems like overkill since it will always
be meaningless on some (most?) platforms. Why not just use a function
attribute? Those few users who do care can check the value of
time.steady.monotonic before calling time.steady(); exceptions raised
will always be whatever the clock actually raises.



If there are still threading problems with my replies, please
email me with details, so that I can try to resolve them. -jJ

Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev [at] python
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/list-python-dev%40lists.gossamer-threads.com

Subject User Time
Issue #10278 -- why not just an attribute? jimjjewett at gmail Mar 19, 2012, 8:51 PM
    Re: Issue #10278 -- why not just an attribute? victor.stinner at gmail Mar 20, 2012, 2:25 AM
    Re: Issue #10278 -- why not just an attribute? nas at arctrix Mar 23, 2012, 1:21 PM

  Index | Next | Previous | View Flat

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.