New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Consider using nanotime() rather than currentMillis() #62

Open

nicost opened this issue Jan 14, 2023 · 1 comment

Member

nicost commented Jan 14, 2023

Nanotime() is guaranteed monotonic, and has a much higher resolution than currentTimeMillis(). See: http://pzemtsov.github.io/2017/07/23/the-slow-currenttimemillis.html

Member

henrypinkard commented Jan 14, 2023

Im all for it!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment