1. Re[2]: sleep() standard function
- Posted by akusaya at gmx.net
Aug 19, 2006
> I agree. I ran into this problem recently too. In the meantime I've been using
> this procedure:
> -- Waits for a specific amount of time passed to it in seconds
> global procedure wait(atom seconds)
> atom start_time
> start_time = time()
> if integer(seconds) then
> sleep(seconds)
> else -- a floating point number
> while time() - start_time < seconds do -- Nothing
> -- Busy loop until `seconds` have elapsed
> end while
> end if
> end procedure -- wait
But laptop users will be angry.
If you use windows, use Sleep in kernel32.
2. Re: Re[2]: sleep() standard function
akusaya wrote:
>
>
> But laptop users will be angry.
>
> If you use windows, use Sleep in kernel32.
Why would laptop users be angry?
3. Re: Re[2]: sleep() standard function
On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 10:36:49 +0800, aku saya <akusaya at gmx.net> wrote:
>But laptop users will be angry.
>
>If you use windows, use Sleep in kernel32.
Aye. As Kat said, I think (I just deleted the message, sorry),
Sleep(0) will relinquish the timeslice, whereas Sleep(-1) is a bit
more permanent (until a mouse message or similar, I think).
Regards,
Pete
