This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Cygwin with clock_gettime and CLOCK_MONOTONIC - gives always 0
- From: Angelo Graziosi <angelo dot graziosi at alice dot it>
- To: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
- Cc: Cygwin <cygwin at cygwin dot com>, fortran <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:34:39 +0200
- Subject: Re: Cygwin with clock_gettime and CLOCK_MONOTONIC - gives always 0
- References: <51674473 dot 3030704 at alice dot it> <20130411235912 dot GA31328 at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
Il 12/04/2013 1.59, Steve Kargl ha scritto:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 01:17:07AM +0200, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
Steve Kargl wrote
disagreemnet is predicated on the stupidity of using a 10 line
example subroutine without actually inspecting what it does on
whatever OS that one chooses to use.
It is just because one has tested that code that these problems came to
When testing, it would help if the results were properly
represented as your initial subject line was "Random seed
initialization". It seems clear to at least me your testing
I DID that:
It is only at the end of it that was opened the new on Cygwin:
BTW, it contains also the link to the first... :)
did not include actually inspecting what these two lines do:
seed = clock + 37 * (/ (i-1), 1=1, n) /)
because your subject would have been "SYSTEM_CLOCK is broken
If you want to see an actual issue with "Random seed initialization"
go read PR 52879.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple