For my purpose, which I simply need different timestamps to distinguish different entries, this is good enough for me. it doesn't seems to matter as my computer cannot even print at a speed that high. This examples uses the MagicMock library of Python. run Run () run.now MagicMock (returnvaluedatetime (2100,01,01) That is it, the methods being tested that call now will return the datetime set as the returnvalue. I am not sure how 'accurate' it really is, but the resolution is at least higher. The following code will mock the now () function defined above when it is called in the Run class. Print('time.perf_counter(): ', datetime0 + timedelta(0, time.perf_counter()-t0)) My code : from datetime import datetime, date,time timeobj time(0, 5) start datetime.now().time() time1 bine(date.min, start) - bine. Print('datetime.now(): ', datetime.now()) I compared it with using time.perf_counter() and adding to the starting datetime Why does that happen? Is there any way that I can get an accurate timestamp down to the microsecond? Actually I don't need microseconds, but it would be nice to get 0.1ms resolution. The strftime to parse time, eg d/m/Y, note that f will parse all the way up to nanoseconds. format: This will be str, but the default is None. However, I always get something like that. Method 1: Convert DateTime to date in Python using DateTime arg: It can be integer, float, tuple, Series, Dataframe to convert into datetime as its datatype. Since it supposes to output in microsecond, I expected that each print will be different. I was testing the resolution of datetime.now().
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |