On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 1:47 AM, Aliaksei Syrel
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> At some point I got a feeling that actual Delay time is longer than
>> expected. It is especially visible on small delays
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 1:47 AM, Aliaksei Syrel
wrote:
> Hi
>
> At some point I got a feeling that actual Delay time is longer than
> expected. It is especially visible on small delays less than 100ms
> (otherwise difference is < 1%).
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
Sent from my iPhone
On 12 mars 2016, at 21:01, Aliaksei Syrel wrote:
>> I get a BoxedFloat64(61.5)
>
> Very strange...
>
> For some unexpected reason you get integers in delay test. But all values
> should be floats. I double checked the script..
>
> There is a
The numbers in that csv from is in float, but with the fraction part is 0.
This is most likely caused by the fact that the precision for timing is in
milliseconds, not microseconds.
Even the #primUTCMicrosecondsClock only updates per millisecond for me.
(Windows).
((1 to: 10) collect: [:n
>
> I get a BoxedFloat64(61.5)
Very strange...
For some unexpected reason you get integers in delay test. But all values
should be floats. I double checked the script..
There is a difference in arithmetic behaviour between mac and windows!
Cheers,
Alex
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Cyril
Le 12/03/2016 20:44, Aliaksei Syrel a écrit :
> I think we just found a serious bug!
>
> Cyrill, could you perform a division in the same image you used for
> delay test and post result here?
>
> 123 / 2.0
>
I get a BoxedFloat64(61.5)
--
Cyril Ferlicot
http://www.synectique.eu
165
I think we just found a serious bug!
Cyrill, could you perform a division in the same image you used for delay
test and post result here?
> 123 / 2.0
On mac I get a float 61.5
Cheers,
Alex
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Cyril Ferlicot D. wrote:
> Le 12/03/2016
Le 12/03/2016 18:47, Aliaksei Syrel a écrit :
> Hi
>
> At some point I got a feeling that actual Delay time is longer than
> expected. It is especially visible on small delays less than 100ms
> (otherwise difference is < 1%).
>
> Inline image 1
> Documentation says that _Delay waits
*Difference is in milliseconds*, sorry :)
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 6:47 PM, Aliaksei Syrel
wrote:
> Hi
>
> At some point I got a feeling that actual Delay time is longer than
> expected. It is especially visible on small delays less than 100ms
> (otherwise difference is <
Hi
At some point I got a feeling that actual Delay time is longer than
expected. It is especially visible on small delays less than 100ms
(otherwise difference is < 1%).
[image: Inline image 1]
Documentation says that *Delay waits approximately* for specified amount of
time. However, according
10 matches
Mail list logo