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=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,URI_HEX autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a0fe76afdfe9e57d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-11 12:29:18 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!212.97.179.223!not-for-mail From: Jano Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: milliseconds and delay until Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 21:29:18 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.97.179.223 X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1055359756 17442545 212.97.179.223 (16 [49872]) X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39003 Date: 2003-06-11T21:29:18+02:00 List-Id: 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 -------------------------