From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f8311a3a7edd715 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-12-13 08:53:19 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!isdnet!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail From: Larry Hazel Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Using "delay until" in real-time Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:53:08 -0600 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Message-ID: <3A37A974.C85EB683@mindspring.com> References: <915jl7$jt5$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <9162gf$1or$1@nnrp1.deja.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: c7.ae.9d.f3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Date: 13 Dec 2000 16:53:10 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,x-ns11F8K63r3NhQ,x-ns2r2e09OnmPe2 Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3076 Date: 2000-12-13T16:53:10+00:00 List-Id: Ted Dennison wrote: > > In article , > "Ken Garlington" wrote: > > For our systems, we usually pick a base iteration rate that can be > > accurately represented (64Hz is popular, although I've also seen 50Hz > > and 80Hz). > > That would indeed be the smart way to do it. > > Unfortunately we have some algorithms that we have to match results with > that *have* to run at 60Hz. Its Legacy Fortran code, written and > controlled by developers at working for our customer who have little > patience with this newfangled "Ada" stuff. > Why don't they have the same rounding problem in FORTRAN? If 60 Hz can't be done exactly in the hardware, language shouldn't matter. Are they using different hardware where 60 Hz is exact? -- Larry Hazel