3 ms·
This is why most things along those lines (timers, etc) should be based on number of ticks since a reference point. Or, alternatively, a signed value (where the
by TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
This is why most things along those lines (timers, etc) should be based on number of ticks since a reference point. Or, alternatively, a signed value (where there is a buffer zone near wrap that errors.)
Not that that doesn't have problems of its own.
- jlouis 12y agoThis is essentially what will be possible now, with a 'CHANGE' event if the underlying clock suddenly warps/jumps to a new point in time. Your code has to be "time warp safe" in that it needs to handle this. Interestingly, most Erlang code will be because most systems will just call erlang:monotonic_time(), leaving the other calls for time-affected applications, which are rarely that many.