It was suggested that it should be ns, and I complained that ns would
be obsolete in a while.
What I really wanted was a switch to Double (and just using seconds),
instead we got ps.
At least ps won't get obsolete in a while.
-- Lennart
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:06 AM, ChrisK
Manlio Perillo wrote:
Hi.
Just out of curiosity, but why Haskell 98 System.CPUTime library module uses picoseconds instead of, say, nanoseconds?
At least on POSIX systems, picoseconds precision is *never* specified.
I have not idea. But at a guess, I would say that 1 ns is not such a small time interval anymore. The CPU speeds are about 3 GHz, so 0.3 ns per CPU clock. Even the RAM clock in a laptop (e.g. Apple's 17" Mac Pro) is 1066 MHz, so the internal there is just under 1 ns.
Whoever picked picoseconds has made it possible to talk about a single clock interval for hardware like this.
-- Chris
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe