time.clock() going backwards??

[Grant Edwards]

Re: time.clock() going backwards??

On 2006-08-28, Grant Edwards <grante@visi.co mwrote:

>>For processors that run at (say) 2GHz, several million (say 10
>>million) represents a difference of 10e6/2e9 = 0.005 seconds
>>between when the processors were sufficiently powered up to
>>start counting cycles.

>

>If it were so, than why can't the delta of time between the
>processors be set to exact zero?

>
This is

Oops. Hit the wrong key. I meant to say:

This is a _Microsoft_Prod uct_. There doesn't have to be a
reason for something to be done in a half-assed manner.

>I assume, that it is known how many cycles adjusting the value
>will take, so it could be done exactly

Yup.

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! People humiliating
at a salami!
visi.com

[Hendrik van Rooyen]

Re: time.clock() going backwards??


"Grant Edwards" <grante@visi.co mWrote:

| On 2006-08-28, Grant Edwards <grante@visi.co mwrote:
|
| >>For processors that run at (say) 2GHz, several million (say 10
| >>million) represents a difference of 10e6/2e9 = 0.005 seconds
| >>between when the processors were sufficiently powered up to
| >>start counting cycles.
| >
| >If it were so, than why can't the delta of time between the
| >processors be set to exact zero?
| >
| This is
|
| Oops. Hit the wrong key. I meant to say:

Thank god! - I know you are not an idiot - and for some minutes you had me
guessing - I was beginning to think that my brain had finally been destroyed by
drink - trying to figure out this enigmatic post... :-)

- Hendrik

8<-----------------

[Ralf Muschall]

Re: time.clock() going backwards??

Grant Edwards wrote:

This is a _Microsoft_Prod uct_. There doesn't have to be a
reason for something to be done in a half-assed manner.

No, it is a quantum effect. If the energy of a clock has a
lower bound, there must be a nonzero probability for it to
run backwards.

See <93ld7n$gv0$1@n ews.state.mn.us >

SCNR, Ralf

[Grant Edwards]

Re: time.clock() going backwards??

On 2006-08-29, Ralf Muschall <rmuschall@teco nt.dewrote:

Grant Edwards wrote:
>

>This is a _Microsoft_Prod uct_. There doesn't have to be a
>reason for something to be done in a half-assed manner.

>
No, it is a quantum effect. If the energy of a clock has a
lower bound, there must be a nonzero probability for it to
run backwards.
>
See <93ld7n$gv0$1@n ews.state.mn.us >

Brain... hurts...

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! JAPAN is a WONDERFUL
at planet -- I wonder if we'll
visi.com ever reach their level of
COMPARATIVE SHOPPING...