Sorry everyone, I had initially posed my for loop wrong... I meant to say for(i = 0; i < 1000; i++).
Mark Hahn clarified the issue and usleep is not actually accurate (provably) and the man page actually has a disclaimer. To me, it seems like usleep(2000) * 50 itterations actually gives a reasonably accurate 1 second delay on machines from 800 mgz to 2 ghz. Mark Hahn actually gave me some more accurate code to do usleep too. Thanks Mark! Thanks Lee ----- Original Message ----- From: CaT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:21:46 +1000 To: Lee Chin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: usleep > On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 05:55:02PM -0500, Lee Chin wrote: > > I would think the following code would wait for 1 second each itteration > > before printing hello, but it waits way too long. Replacing the for > > loop body with a usleep(1000000) works great... what am I missing here? > > usleep = micro sleep = sleep in 1/1000000 second incrememnts. > > -- > Martin's distress was in contrast to the bitter satisfaction of some > of his fellow marines as they surveyed the scene. "The Iraqis are sick > people and we are the chemotherapy," said Corporal Ryan Dupre. "I am > starting to hate this country. Wait till I get hold of a friggin' Iraqi. > No, I won't get hold of one. I'll just kill him." > - http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2479.htm -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs
