On Wednesday 12 July 2006 09:58, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > On 12 jul 2006, at 11:25, Marco van de Voort wrote: > > > > sleep(0) is quite bad, because it may not necessarily give up any > > timeslice. At least very short nanosleeps seem to be implemented as > > spinning loops on Mac OS X, so maybe sleep(0) is the same. > > Do you know a correct way of doing this on *nix?
"sched_yield()"? Seems to be POSIX, so I suppose it's available on most Unices. Vinzent. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
