[issue14309] Deprecate time.clock()

[Marc-Andre Lemburg]

Marc-Andre Lemburg <mal at egenix.com> added the comment:

STINNER Victor wrote:
> 
> STINNER Victor <victor.stinner at gmail.com> added the comment:
> 
>> There's no other single function providing the same functionality
> 
> time.clock() is not portable: it is a different clock depending on the OS. To write portable code, you have to use the right function:
> 
>  - time.time()
>  - time.steady()
>  - os.times(), resource.getrusage()

time.clock() does exactly what the docs say: you get access to
a CPU timer. It's normal that CPU timers work differently on
different OSes.

> On Windows, time.clock() should be replaced by time.steady().

What for ? time.clock() uses the same timer as time.steady() on Windows,
AFAICT, so all you change is the name of the function.

> On UNIX, time.clock() can be replaced with "usage=os.times(); usage[0]+usage[1]" for example.

And what's the advantage of that over using time.clock() directly ?

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue14309>
_______________________________________