1. tick_rate()
Hmmm, if I change the value of tick_rate to say, tick_rate(100), how
would this affect other programs that may be running under a
multitasking system. Obviously, some multitasking relies upon clock
interrupts so...
The reason I ask is that I am looking into a simple multitasking unit
(er, .e file <G>) for my programs. I can base it upon the clock
interrrupt of 18.2 ticks, which would give the ability of less tasks, or
some other for to base my task distribution.
Thanks!
Kevin Sieger
2. Re: tick_rate()
--
>The reason I ask is that I am looking into a simple multitasking unit
>(er, .e file <G>) for my programs. I can base it upon the clock
>interrrupt of 18.2 ticks, which would give the ability of less tasks, or
>some other for to base my task distribution.
The language war game uses a simple multi tasker....
Monty in Oregon
3. Re: tick_rate()
- Posted by Robert Craig <rds at EMAIL.MSN.COM>
Mar 01, 1998
-
Last edited Mar 02, 1998
Kevin Sieger writes:
> Hmmm, if I change the value of tick_rate to say, tick_rate(100), how
> would this affect other programs that may be running under a
> multitasking system. Obviously, some multitasking relies upon clock
> interrupts so...
You can change the tick_rate without affecting other
programs on your system. They will see the time advancing
at the correct rate. Here's a little test program that you can
use to experiment with tick_rate():
include machine.e
--tick_rate(100)
while 1 do
printf(1, "%.1f \r", time())
if get_key() != -1 then
exit
end if
end while
Try it with and without the tick rate set. Try running it in 2 different
DOS windows. You might notice that time does not
advance in the "background" window on Win95 when the
tick_rate is not the default, whereas in Win3.1
it seems to advance in one big jump when you make it the
foreground window again. Have fun.
The only problem that I know of is described in library.doc,
where if your program dies prematurely, you might have to reboot
a win3.1 system to get the correct rate of time advancement
again.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
4. tick_rate()
hI!
EU>Hmmm, if I change the value of tick_rate to say, tick_rate(100), how
EU>would this affect other programs that may be running under a
EU>multitasking system. Obviously, some multitasking relies upon clock
EU>interrupts so...
The fact is that W95 hangs when you try to program the 8253 timer chip
:(
EU>The reason I ask is that I am looking into a simple multitasking unit
EU>(er, .e file <G>) for my programs. I can base it upon the clock
EU>interrrupt of 18.2 ticks, which would give the ability of less tasks, or
EU>some other for to base my task distribution.
You should reprogram the timer, and them call the old handler according
to the number of times your handler has already been executed, and the
fre-
cuency you programmed the timer to oscillate...}
That menas, you must call the old handler at the "old" frequency..
Bye! :)
Fernando Ariel Gont
gstuff at siscor.bibnal.edu.ar
