Skip to content

bpo-43407: Docs: Clarify comparisons of time.monotonic() et al results #24757

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 6, 2021
Merged

bpo-43407: Docs: Clarify comparisons of time.monotonic() et al results #24757

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 6, 2021

Conversation

moreati
Copy link
Contributor

@moreati moreati commented Mar 4, 2021 •
edited by bedevere-bot
Loading

Previous wording implied that only the result of call N and N+1 could be
meaningfully compared. Whereas comparing call N and N+M is fine.

https://bugs.python.org/issue43407

@moreati
bpo-43407: Docs: Clarify comparisons of time.monotonic() et al results
a999dc2 
Previous wording implied that only the result of call N and N+1 could be
meaningfully compared. Whereas comparing call N and N+M is fine.
@moreati moreati requested review from abalkin and pganssle as code owners March 4, 2021 22:54
@bedevere-bot bedevere-bot added docs Documentation in the Doc dir awaiting review labels Mar 4, 2021
@terryjreedy
Copy link
Member

Alex, thank you for having a validated CLA signing before submitting this, your first PR for this repository.

There might be even better wording, but this is an improvement and likely not worth extended bikeshedding.

@terryjreedy terryjreedy merged commit ff5f059 into python:master Mar 6, 2021
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @moreati for the PR, and @terryjreedy for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.8, 3.9.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry @moreati and @terryjreedy, I had trouble checking out the 3.9 backport branch.
Please backport using cherry_picker on command line.
cherry_picker ff5f05934db241dfafc604989b2de3487b09ca82 3.9

miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2021
@moreati @miss-islington
bpo-43407: Clarify comparisons of time.monotonic() et al results (pyt…
850c0a6 
…honGH-24757)

Previous wording implied that only the result of call N and N+1 could be
meaningfully compared, whereas comparing call N and N+M is fine.
(cherry picked from commit ff5f059)

Co-authored-by: Alex Willmer <[email protected]>
@bedevere-bot
Copy link

GH-24768 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.8 branch.

@terryjreedy terryjreedy added needs backport to 3.9 only security fixes and removed needs backport to 3.9 only security fixes labels Mar 6, 2021
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @moreati for the PR, and @terryjreedy for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.9.
🐍🍒⛏🤖 I'm not a witch! I'm not a witch!

miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2021
@moreati @miss-islington
bpo-43407: Clarify comparisons of time.monotonic() et al results (pyt…
6a6e208 
…honGH-24757)

Previous wording implied that only the result of call N and N+1 could be
meaningfully compared, whereas comparing call N and N+M is fine.
(cherry picked from commit ff5f059)

Co-authored-by: Alex Willmer <[email protected]>
@bedevere-bot bedevere-bot removed the needs backport to 3.9 only security fixes label Mar 6, 2021
@bedevere-bot
Copy link

GH-24769 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.9 branch.

miss-islington added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2021
@miss-islington @moreati
bpo-43407: Clarify comparisons of time.monotonic() et al results (GH-…
e12a9e2 
…24757)

Previous wording implied that only the result of call N and N+1 could be
meaningfully compared, whereas comparing call N and N+M is fine.
(cherry picked from commit ff5f059)

Co-authored-by: Alex Willmer <[email protected]>
miss-islington added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2021
@miss-islington @moreati
bpo-43407: Clarify comparisons of time.monotonic() et al results (GH-…
65f3a0d 
…24757)

Previous wording implied that only the result of call N and N+1 could be
meaningfully compared, whereas comparing call N and N+M is fine.
(cherry picked from commit ff5f059)

Co-authored-by: Alex Willmer <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@abalkin abalkin Awaiting requested review from abalkin

@pganssle pganssle Awaiting requested review from pganssle

Assignees

@terryjreedy terryjreedy

Labels
docs Documentation in the Doc dir
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@moreati @terryjreedy @miss-islington @bedevere-bot @the-knights-who-say-ni