Thanks for the quick response. > I have a specific application that requires better timing than sleep() > can provide, so I need the original busy-wait solution or something very > close to it. I don't mind adding a sleep() based throttling mechanism > as well, but people who use it need to realize it's limitations.
I understand that. I'm not looking to change the FlightGear baseline...just a solution that does what I need. How precise is the timing of the naitive-gui ? If I have my simulation use a blocking socket to receive messages, this can provide the interrupt to schedule my simulation. The only problem there would be that if a packet is dropped, the simulation will miss a frame (unlikely if they're on the same PC). Does native-gui run in its own thread, or is it limited to FlightGear's frame rate? I'm just brainstorming here...I still don't know what my ideal solution is. Drew _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
