On Tuesday, 8 December 2015 at 16:40:04 UTC, Taylor Hillegeist
wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 December 2015 at 15:35:18 UTC, Taylor Hillegeist
wrote:
So, I mostly do programming that is of run to completion
I took a stab at the problem:
http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/2eef530d00fc
0 nsecs with jitter of :500000000 nsecs
498937256 nsecs with jitter of :1062744 nsecs
499036173 nsecs with jitter of :963827 nsecs
500025650 nsecs with jitter of :25650 nsecs
500020735 nsecs with jitter of :20735 nsecs
499057062 nsecs with jitter of :942938 nsecs
498932033 nsecs with jitter of :1067967 nsecs
591037317 nsecs with jitter of :91037317 nsecs
499032794 nsecs with jitter of :967206 nsecs
499034637 nsecs with jitter of :965363 nsecs
499022963 nsecs with jitter of :977037 nsecs
498976577 nsecs with jitter of :1023423 nsecs
499076723 nsecs with jitter of :923277 nsecs
499023885 nsecs with jitter of :976115 nsecs
499018048 nsecs with jitter of :981952 nsecs
499004224 nsecs with jitter of :995776 nsecs
499048461 nsecs with jitter of :951539 nsecs
499013747 nsecs with jitter of :986253 nsecs
499018048 nsecs with jitter of :981952 nsecs
499007604 nsecs with jitter of :992396 nsecs
However i seem to get jitter of around 1 ms. Is there anything
else i can do to improve?
1) a computer is not real-time, for example audio is always
buffered (e.g 512 samples)
2) thread are not good for timing. In a simple test you could get
satisfying results while in a stressed IRL environment it won't
work as well. so you should rather use the OS API to make a timer
(or the one proposed by a framework if it applies, for example
gui app with SDL: SDL timer).
However if you want to have better times you can use core.time in
a thread callback:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
// to, t1 and interval are uint;
if (!t0) t0 = TickDuration.currSystemTick.msecs;
t1 = TickDuration.currSystemTick.msecs;
if ((t1 - t0) > interval)
{
t0 = 0;
onTimer();
}
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
