Re: cputime for Windows octave-2.9.16s is strange

[dbateman]

John W. Eaton wrote:
> 
> On  9-Nov-2007, David Bateman wrote:
> 
> | cputime. tic and toc were moved to be built-in functions in 2.9.16 as
> | for times shorter than 20ms, if was the symbol table code for the
> | benchmarking code itself that was limiting the time resolution. That is
> | something like "tic; sum(ones(4,1)); toc" or "t=cputime();
> | sum(ones(4,1)); cputime()-t" was limited by the symbol table code for
> | the tic, toc and cputime functions whereas sum is a builtin.
> | 
> | When doing this it appears I made a mistake in the windows code.. I
> | believe the appropriate fix is the attached.
> 
> I applied this patch.  1e-7?  Weird.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> jwe
> 
> 


I agree its a little weird, but reading the windows specific code in
Fgetrusage it seems to be correct.

D.
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/cputime-for-Windows-octave-2.9.16s-is-strange-tf4775440.html#a13674862
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.