|
From: Ethan G. <eth...@gm...> - 2012-10-12 19:38:38
|
On Oct 11, 2012, at 2:58 PM, Benjamin Root wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Mark Lawrence <bre...@ya...> wrote: > On 11/10/2012 10:55, Damon McDougall wrote: > > > Am I missing something here? Are seconds just floats internally? A > > delta of 1e-6 is nothing (pardon the pun). A delta of 1e-9 is the > > *least* I'd expect. Maybe even 1e-12. Perhaps the python interpreter > > doesn't do any denormalising<http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9314534/why-does-changing-0-1f-to-0-slow-down-performance-by-10x> > > when encountered with deltas very close to zero... > > > > What percentage of computer users wants a delta of 1e-12? I suspect > that the vast majority of users couldn't care two hoots about miniscule > > > Preach on, my brother! Preach on! > > [psst -- you are facing the choir...] I'm a little confused by this attitude. I recognize that there are issues around dates, I've written a few date libraries myself to get around insane excel date issues (pop quiz for anyone at MS, was 1900 a leap year?) or just to simplify APIs for my own use. But do neither of you think that nanoseconds are important to scientists? I know of enough projects that work with pico (and a few with femto) seconds. Even though I often work with climate data covering ~100s of years and used to work with geologic data covering ~billions of years, I may start working with raw laser data for distance measurements where nanoseconds can be a pretty big deal. These data would be collected over a few years time, so a date utility that can handle that scale range would be useful. I guess I'll be writing my own date/time library again and hacking together some way of plotting data in a meaningful way in matplotlib. Don't get me wrong, matplotlib shouldn't have to reinvent the wheel here, but claiming that nobody could possibly care about 1e-12 seconds seems a little provincial. My apologies if that is not how the above statements were intended. regards, Ethan |