Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Roedy Green Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: code for native functions Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 11:21:27 -0800 Organization: Canadian Mind Products Lines: 19 Message-ID: References: <5pqsi8ll07l62voutrp79njhijrsj8c9sv@4ax.com> <%juXs.110035$O02.46330@newsfe18.iad> Reply-To: Roedy Green NNTP-Posting-Host: K2Qzzs3EAqXk5RLzfhxcSw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:22629 On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:50:03 -0800, Daniel Pitts wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >nanoTime doesn't necessarily use the CPU nanocounter. That makes sense. I was thinking about the ways various CPU cores change frequencies, go to sleep, get overclocked etc. Threads could run on all the cores for short periods of time. An instruction counter on each CPU seemed pretty useless. I could not see how you could reasonably reconstruct a global time from them. You'd think a common high frequency counter of standard frequency would not be rocket science. -- Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com One thing I love about having a website, is that when I complain about something, I only have to do it once. It saves me endless hours of grumbling.