[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 15:08:03 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: sign (in)consistency between architectures
* Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@...ia.fr> [2013-05-02 14:12:37 +0200]:
> Am Donnerstag, den 02.05.2013, 12:13 +0200 schrieb Szabolcs Nagy:
> >
> > t = (double)clock();
> >
> > (eg the time module in python does this) where interesting
> > low bits may get lost if clock_t is uint64_t
>
>
> *and* if the actual value is larger than (1ull << 50) or something
> like that.
larger than (1ull << 53)
so it does not matter if the counter always start from 0
at process startup
btw the times() fallback in the current clock code seems
to be wrong: it multiplies the result by 100 which would
mean 10000 Hz kernel clock tick
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
