On 06May2012 09:18, Bob Cowdery <b...@bobcowdery.plus.com> wrote: | On 05/05/2012 23:05, Cameron Simpson wrote: | > On 05May2012 20:33, Bob Cowdery <b...@bobcowdery.plus.com> wrote: | > | [...] calls to time.time() always return the same | > | time which is usually several seconds in the past or future and always | > | has no fractional part. | > | > Thought #1: you are calling time.time() and haven't unfortunately | > renamed it? (I doubt this scenario, though the lack of fractional part | > is interesting.) | | Not sure what you mean by renamed it.
Like this: from time import time [...] time = some_unfortunate_other_function [...] now = time() # calls wrong function It seems unlikely, but possible. | I also tried datetime and that had | the same behaviour. Makes my suggestion even less likely unless the time module itself gets monkeypatched (i.e. "time.time = bad_function" somewhere). | > | If I leave it long enough time will suddently | > | jump forward after a few minutes, then again after a few minutes more. | > | | > | I've never encountered this behaviour before and can't understand what | > | on earth is going on. If I call the 'C' time() function just the other | > | side of my call to the extension the time is ticking along fine. It's | > | just the one Python thread that is affected. | > [...] | > | > Thought #2: On a UNIX system I'd be running the process under strace (or | > dtrace or ktrace depending on flavour) to see what actual OS system calls are | > being made during this behaviour. Is this feasible for you? | | I'm on Windows for this particular part of the application. I'd guessed so. I've no Windows programming background; I was wondering if there was something like this you had to hand on windows. | [...] But debugging into this is probably the only way. I | looked at the built-in time module. As far as I can tell it just calls | the underlying C time() function as an extension. This is more | mystifying as that is pretty much what I'm doing by checking the time in | my own extension module where it ticks along fine. Hmm. A C extension I presume? How about writing a little pure Python thread to call time.time(), and spin it off parallel to the rest of the app; does it also get bad time.time() behaviour? | I have another | scenario using a different part of their SDK where the time does still | tick but the fractional part is frozen, not 0 but frozen. Curiouser and curiouser. -- Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au> DoD#743 http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/ As you can see, unraveling even a small part of 'sendmail' can introduce more complexity than answers. - Brian Costales, _sendmail_ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
