On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Guido van Rossum <[email protected]> wrote: > Given the amount of disagreement I sense, I think we'll need to wait > for more people to chime in.
I currently can't imagine why I *personally* would want anything better than what we currently call time.time. For that reason, I like Cameron's proposal best. If and when I have a use case, I'll be able to query the system for the clock that has the best combination of desirable properties. Admittedly, by then the answer probably will be "time.time."<wink/> _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com