From: Bob Bell (belvis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-14 19:09:03
Caleb Epstein <caleb.epstein <at> gmail.com> writes:
> As far as the appropriate subseconds type goes, we should probably
> pick the highest-possible resolution that makes sense, which I'd
> contend is probably microseconds. Some operating systems may be able
> to slice time (and signal events) at resolutions below milliseconds,
> but I doubt any can go deeper than microseconds.
I wouldn't take that bet. I know Mac OS X can measure time as finely
as nanoseconds (but I have no idea how many services, i.e. sockets,
actually work at nanosecond resolutions; it doesn't seem outside the
realm of possibility that, given the way technologies advance, that
within a few short years, microseconds simply won't be fine enough.
One of the nice things about double-as-time-unit is that it avoids
resolution issues altogether.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk