this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
3 points (80.0% liked)

General Programming Discussion

7816 readers
2 users here now

A general programming discussion community.

Rules:

  1. Be civil.
  2. Please start discussions that spark conversation

Other communities

Systems

Functional Programming

Also related

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

bmakelib is a minimalist standard library for writing Makefiles.

What do you think about being able to easily generate µsecond precision timestamps in a Makefile?

Please take a second to look at https://github.com/bahmanm/bmakelib/issues/42 & share your thoughts/emojis 🙏

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bahmanm@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Good point 👍

Likewise, I never thought I'd need any timestamp w/ a finer resolution than millis, until my tests started failing:

There is a feature in bmakelib (called !!logged) which logs the stdout/err of a given target to disk. When I was writing tests for it, I noticed that occasionally my tests fail where they shouldn't have (for context, the tests used to create files w/ millis resolution and then check the contents.) Turned out the my tests were fast enough that more than 1 of them would run and finish in a single millisecond causing the "expected" files to be overwritten.

That's how I got to thinking that it may be something which can be added to bmakelib.

The benefit is that you don't need to do much and you ensure the timestamp has a high resolution. That will make it harder to produce difficult-to-debug bugs 😅

The downsides are 1) cognitive load (yet another thing to know about) 2) filenames/variables/... will have 3 extra characters which stand for µ fraction.

Does that make sense?