OpenEuphoria

Re: Timing

• Posted by Jiri Babor <J.Babor at GNS.CRI.NZ> Jan 11, 1999
• 722 views

Mark,

Basically I do not trust your mathematics skills . You wrote:

>    while check_timer() < 4 do  --4 miliseconds = 25 Fps.

The rate of 25 frames per second corresponds to 1/25 = 0.040 s, which
is obviously 40 milliseconds per frame!

So I decided to check your performance degradation claim, and it too
seems to be highly exaggerated.

ON a  266 MHz P II machine under Windows I get one million time()
calls in about 0.7 s, less than one *micro*second per call! Even on a
typical 486 system I would not expect more than about 10 microseconds
per time() call. But your 1 to 2 fps performance degradation claim
would imply (at 20 fps) about 5 to 10 *milli*seconds loss. Not bloody
likely!  jiri


ps bonus: If you need just a rough, quick timer and, for some reason,
cannot use the time() function the following works:

    integer tfm -- ticks from midnight
    tfm = peek4u(#46C)

Unfortunately, the tick rate at this location is *not* affected by the
tick_rate() routine, so you are stuck with the standard 18.2 ticks per
second using this shortcut...