ridder@elvira.enet.dec.com (Hans Ridder) (12/20/89)
In article <14996@well.UUCP> farren@well.UUCP (Mike Farren) writes: >In article <12147@cbnewsc.ATT.COM> gregg@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (gregg.g.wonderly) writes: >>From article <828@wet.UUCP>, by mcw@wet.UUCP (Martin Warnett): >> Delay (60*n); > ^^------- 50 * n, please - Delay works in 50ths of a second. >>the code was written with huge amounts of StartIO/WaitIO and other such >>nonsense. > >Huge amounts of StartIO/WaitIO implies usage of timer.device, .... ^^^^ I don't understand. Why "huge" amounts of StartIO()/WaitIO()? When I use the timer.device (for a simple delay), it usually takes just one simple DoIO(), and about three lines of code to set it up (not counting the CreatePort() ... OpenDevice(), etc.) Although I can never remember the contents of the silly timeval structure, it always seemed fairly simple to me. Am I missing something, or are Mike and Gregg exaggerating for effect? >-- >Mike Farren farren@well.sf.ca.usa -hans ======================================================================== Hans-Gabriel Ridder Digital Equipment Corporation ridder@elvira.enet.dec.com Customer Support Center ...decwrl!elvira.enet!ridder Colorado Springs, CO