Re^3: The most precise second (timer)

in reply to Re^2: The most precise second (timer)
in thread The most precise second (timer)

You miss the point of this test. Anonymous Monk's point is not to suggest calling out to an external perl. The point is that sleep() itself has inherently imprecise. You requested sleep(1) but actually got 1.000147 seconds of sleep. Therefore fussing over 0.00000XXXX seconds of "error" is futile.

Good Day,
Dean

Comment on Re^3: The most precise second (timer) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: The most precise second (timer) by haukex (Archbishop) on Nov 27, 2019 at 11:49 UTC
Therefore fussing over 0.00000XXXX seconds of "error" is futile. Yes, but the error is cumulative: 1.000147 seconds of sleep over one day amounts to an error of about 12 seconds, which might be worth fussing over...	[reply]
Re^5: The most precise second (timer) by duelafn (Parson) on Nov 28, 2019 at 16:17 UTC
The error is not cumulative in the OP code nor most of the suggestions. Good Day, Dean	[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom