Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > I think the goal to have our own stopwatch so that we do not have to > worry about differences among system-provided ones makes sense. > > The only thing that may become an issue is how widely available > getnanotime() is. As "test-date" itself is built on any platform an > end-user/developer runs our tests, which is wider set of platforms > than what we run Travis and other CIs on, unconditionally relying on > its availability might pose an issue.
Sorry for a false alarm, as the codebase in many places like fsmonitor, progress, trace and wt-status have been assuming getnanotime() to be available for quite some time, and this is just another user of the same function.
