From: Jano <nono@celes.unizar.es>
Subject: Re: milliseconds and delay until
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 21:29:18 +0200
Date: 2003-06-11T21:29:18+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <MPG.1951a1783494a82c98971b@News.CIS.DFN.DE> (raw)
In-Reply-To: bc7u91$t2t$00$1@news.t-online.com
Thomas Bruns dice...
> Jano wrote:
>
> > Thomas Bruns dice...
> > Why not use better a Time type from start?
> >
> > Next : Time := Clock;
> >
> > Next := Next + 0.1;
> >
> > delay until Next;
> mmhhhh... 0.1 is milliseconds :-) but I mean, that the time type + duration
> (0.1) is not alright... I test it
Correct, durations are in seconds. However I don't quite understand you.
What do you mean with that's is not right? What problem are you having?
--
-------------------------
Jano
402450.at.cepsz.unizar.es
-------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-11 19:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-11 18:31 milliseconds and delay until Thomas Bruns
2003-06-11 18:46 ` Jano
2003-06-11 18:58 ` Thomas Bruns
2003-06-11 19:29 ` Jano [this message]
2003-06-11 19:49 ` Simon Wright
2003-06-11 20:29 ` tmoran
2003-06-12 6:20 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2003-06-11 19:59 ` Frank J. Lhota
2003-06-12 3:06 ` Steve
2003-06-12 20:26 ` Simon Wright
2003-06-12 21:41 ` Martin Dowie
2003-06-14 6:04 ` Simon Wright
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox