Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #94839

Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC

Show key headers only | View raw

Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> writes:
> Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
>> Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> writes:
[...]
>>> Or write a wrapper that returns the equivalent in nanoseconds.
>>
>> Assuming that 1/CLOCKS_PER_SEC is a whole number of nanoseconds.
>> (I don't object to making the assumption, I'm just pointing out
>> that it is one.)
>
> Well, 10^9 rather than 1.

No, I wrote "whole number of nanoseconds".  (And to be clear,
1/CLOCKS_PER_SEC is intended to be a mathematical expression over
the real numbers, not a C expression which would almost certainly
yield 0.)

> I don't think that assumption is actually required; rounding to
> the nearest nanosecond is not going to introduce additional error
> in any existing implementations I know, and that probably won't
> change in the near future.
>
> But, yes, I was making an implicit assumption that nanoseconds
> can adequately represent the time value involved.

Just returning the integer value of CLOCKS_PER_SEC and doing any
required calculations in the "foreign" language avoids the issue
altogether.  If there are rounding issues, I'd rather isolate them
within the code that works on the values than expose them in the
interface that defines the values.

But it's not a huge deal.  If having the interface give you a number
of nanoseconds is more convenient for some reason, it's probably
not going to cause too many problems.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

CLOCKS_PER_SEC BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-10-13 14:49 +0100
  Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-13 08:57 -0700
    Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-13 09:07 -0700
      Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-10-13 23:18 +0100
        Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-10-13 23:30 +0100
          Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-13 16:27 -0700
            Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-10-16 10:02 +0000
              Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-16 11:32 -0700
    Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> - 2016-10-13 12:19 -0400
      Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-13 11:29 -0700
        Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> - 2016-10-13 14:39 -0400
          Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-13 12:03 -0700
        Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-14 07:47 -0700
  Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2016-10-14 16:21 +0300
    Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-14 08:41 -0700
      Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2016-10-14 18:56 +0300
        Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2016-10-14 09:49 -0700
        Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-10-14 11:14 -0700
          Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-14 11:32 -0700
      Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-10-14 11:56 -0400
        Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2016-10-14 19:53 +0300
          Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-10-14 09:57 -0700
          Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-10-14 18:18 +0100
        Re: CLOCKS_PER_SEC Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-10-16 02:55 -0700

csiph-web