Re: Need Win Guru/Tester
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:51:01 -0600, "C. K. Lester"
<cklester at yahoo.com> wrote:
>Pete! Thanks so much!
No prob. You owe me a favour or two by now though ;) He he
>How would you resolve this, however: the loop uses done, but then it =
exits
>if done is true inside the actual looping code. What I'm thinking is =
that it
>can be optimized or done differently so there aren't two tests for done =
in
>the same loop code.
>
>while done=3D0 do -- here's done
> SDL_PumpEvents()
> if done then exit end if -- here's done
Personally I probably wouldn't bother. I don't know -er anything-
about the SDL_ processing innards. When you resort to using an
external library (including windows dll files which I use) the
overheads of a few local lines are zip compared to just one
unnecessary call.
The only hints I have come from recent use of win32lib's doEvents(0).
It took me an embarrassing while to realise this, but any flags etc I
could check could _only_ have been altered as an indirect consequence
of that call. I could write 20GB of data to disk, calculate PI to a
trillion decimal places, and no other line of my code could *possibly*
have been executed, hence none of my flags changed until just after
calling doEvents(0). Guess where I put my tests.
I also found it quite prohibitively expensive to start calling
doEvents(0) too often. At one point I introduced a counter to
basically draw 100 things between each call to doEvents(0)/check for
termination condition. The routine itself is not at fault; it's not
especially slow; but it is utterly pointless to call it more that 25
times a second. The human eye, mice, keyboards, joysticks, etc do not
respond any (or much) faster than that.
SDL_PumpEvents() may or may not be similar to doEvents().
I didn't realise the name similarity when I last posted.
Pete
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
