John Ridge wrote:
sec
I don't understand the point of "wait 0..." When I comment out the line, the
program runs 300 revolutions in 2300 millisecs on my system (this is an
average of 10 trials, using the default settings as in the stack you
uploaded). With the line back in at "wait 0", it takes 1962 ms on average.
This seems a little odd.
But the weird thing is that the second, faster version with "wait 0..."
actually runs far more slowly - the millisecs are lying to me! Using a
stopwatch (I know :-)) I reckon it takes about 10 times as long as it
reports - around 19 seconds in real time, while the commented-out version is
running in just about the time that the millisecs report.
I have looked hard at the code, and at the documentation of "wait". Now my
brain hurts. What am I missing?
Don't know what's going on for you. I can tell you the observations of
timing on my system ....
Code Points updates
msec wristwatch :-)
as downloaded
wait 1 ms .... 4622 106 5648 6 seconds seems right
modified to
wait 0 ms 4622 2 109 less than a second
commented out
-- .... 4622 2 99 less than a second
Is it possible you put in O (the letter) instead of 0 (the digit) ?
(shouldn't be - gives me an error - but maybe different settings ???)
The point of "wait 0 msec with messages" is to provide an opportunity
for other messages to be handled. In this case, the "Stop" button can be
pressed and will stop the drawing by unsetting "gKeepDrawing"; without
the wait line, processing this message wouldn't happen until after the
loop had finished.
--
Alex Tweedly http://www.tweedly.net
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.8/22 - Release Date: 17/06/2005
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
