Marc-Andre Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> added the comment: Marc-Andre Lemburg wrote: > >> Alexander Belopolsky <alexander.belopol...@gmail.com> added the comment: >> >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 4:17 AM, Marc-Andre Lemburg <rep...@bugs.python.org> >> wrote: >>> ... full C double precision for the time part of a timestamp, >>> which covers nanoseconds just fine. >> >> No, it does not: >> >>>>> import time >>>>> t = time.time() >>>>> t + 5e-9 == t >> True >> >> In fact, C double precision is barely enough to cover microseconds: >> >>>>> t + 1e-6 == t >> False >> >>>>> t + 1e-7 == t >> True > > I was referring to the use of a C double to store the time part > in mxDateTime. mxDateTime uses the C double to store the number of > seconds since midnight, so you don't run into the Unix ticks value > range problem you showcased above.
There's enough room to even store 1/100th of a nanosecond, which may be needed for some physics experiments :-) False >>> x == x + 1e-10 False >>> x == x + 1e-11 False >>> x == x + 1e-12 True ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15443> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
