Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"

On 4/15/2025 2:10 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:

BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> writes:

On 4/15/2025 12:22 PM, David Brown wrote:

 

I am not saying that the smaller times don't exist, but that there is no
point in wasting bits encoding times more accurate than can be used by a
computer running at a few GHz, with clock speeds that will likely never
exceed a few GHz.
>
This sets the practical limit mostly in nanosecond territory.

 If you try to close timing on any reasonably speed processor design
you're talking 10s of picoseconds for a 3Ghz design target.
 

3GHz means a cycle time of around 333ps, or around 3 clock cycles per nanosecond.
A cycle time of 10 picoseconds would require 100 GHz, not gonna happen.
This is not to say that picoseconds don't matter for electronics design.
But, just, they don't really matter for typical software use cases.