Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>..., but I darn well better *know* that I can't sleep(.25), or
>>strange things are gonna happen.
> But you can fake sleep() with select() or whatever.
$ cat sl.pasm
sleep 0.1
end
$ time parrot sl.pasm
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>That would seem like good future proofing. Someday every computer will
>have decentish subsecond timing. I hope to see it in my lifetime...
It isn't having the sub-second time in the computer it is the API
to get at it...
>
>My guess is that eventuall
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>In an attempt to drain the swamp...
>
>So far as I can see, we need, in descending order of importance (and
>speed) (And if there's stuff missing, add them):
>
>1) A timestamp value
>2) A way to chop the timestamp to pieces
>3) A way to turn the timestamp
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:59:32AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: That means we can't convert to TAI, since that needs leap second info
: we don't have, so base time can't be TAI.
That part is only half true. Or maybe less than half, if UTC decides
to cut loose from astronomical time and ends up t
