From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id F10AB3858D33; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 14:38:22 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F10AB3858D33 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1709908703; bh=0HoTeKvN7jB7+vTlu/DCY8Gl2xOoLxIH0cYcfyEjKDg=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=c3ZhFCeqy5JDA++HTJYqSBwZdFWeX/zAOSVrejSlg/b2DGHxpeDQu1HjeSOntU6Nn w+Hmz5g4IXjdQWUtB8rcfNE9ZE6tJX9jBCj5d6vO38IsgPkLVOp6ZOM02wsXPljjTT te6voslQkOlH1W6J1hvzK2bLshk6vEpYs6naNHro= From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/63400] [C++11]precision of std::chrono::high_resolution_clock Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:38:22 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.1 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: minor X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D63400 --- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #14) > Or maybe the testcase makes invalid assumptions and isn't really measuring > what it thinks it's measuring? e.g. maybe clock_getres says 100ns even though the clocks aren't really that precise.=