On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 6:07 PM Ola Røer Thorsen <o...@silentwings.no> wrote:
> What's wrong with the sleep functions in particular? > They're uninterruptible. In 99.9(9)% of cases there's a better way to suspend a thread for some time than unconditionally putting it to sleep. > Are they worse than calling for example unistd.h's "usleep" or > "std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(x));"? > No.
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
