Skip to content

time: Clarify MissedTickBehavior documentation #7941

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

Open
chrisduerr wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

time: Clarify MissedTickBehavior documentation #7941

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
14 changes: 8 additions & 6 deletions tokio/src/time/interval.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -175,6 +175,9 @@ fn internal_interval_at(
/// `MissedTickBehavior` can be used to specify a different behavior for
/// [`Interval`] to exhibit. Each variant represents a different strategy.
///
/// With all tick behaviors, the next tick after a missed tick will always
/// complete immediately.
///
/// Note that because the executor cannot guarantee exact precision with timers,
/// these strategies will only apply when the delay is greater than 5
/// milliseconds.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -294,12 +297,11 @@ pub enum MissedTickBehavior {
/// When this strategy is used, [`Interval`] schedules the next tick to fire
/// at the next-closest tick that is a multiple of `period` away from
/// `start` (the point where [`Interval`] first ticked). Like [`Burst`], all
/// ticks remain multiples of `period` away from `start`, but unlike
/// [`Burst`], the ticks may not be *one* multiple of `period` away from the
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@chrisduerr chrisduerr Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just realized that this is most likely a typo and meant to say Delay when I wrote the commit message. If someone can confirm this I can change that rather than removing this section entirely.

/// last tick. Like [`Delay`], the ticks are no longer the same as they
/// would have been if ticks had not been missed, but unlike [`Delay`], and
/// like [`Burst`], the ticks may be shortened to be less than one `period`
/// away from each other.
/// ticks remain multiples of `period` away from `start`. Like [`Delay`],
/// the number of fired ticks are no longer the same as they would have been
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@chrisduerr chrisduerr Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Personally I think rephrasing this as "number of fired ticks" is an improvement compared to just "ticks are no longer the same", especially since a lot of this section talks about duration and not count.

That said, this was mostly a driveby idea I had for rephrasing things, I'm happy to discard if you disagree with this change.

/// if ticks had not been missed, but unlike [`Delay`], and like [`Burst`],
/// the ticks may be shortened to be less than one `period` away from each
/// other.
///
/// This looks something like this:
/// ```text
Expand Down
Loading