From: michael bode <m.g.bode@web.de>
Subject: Re: Strange behaviour of delay in Windows XP
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 07:18:57 +0200
Date: 2010-10-08T07:18:57+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <i8m9k2$e6f$1@news.eternal-september.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <i8li6b$m9d$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
Am 08.10.2010 00:37, schrieb Jeffrey Carter:
> The relative delay is inherently imprecise; add that to the lousy timing
> on Windows and such results are not as surprising as they should be.
I've seen that Windows has a larger error than Linux (<15ms vs. <1ms) in
the cases that I call 'working'. But really: 1.7s timing error in a 1s
delay? Is it *that* bad?
> Try
>
> delay until T1 + D;
>
> and see if that makes a difference.
Yepp, I will try that.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-08 5:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-07 21:04 Strange behaviour of delay in Windows XP michael bode
2010-10-07 21:35 ` Vinzent Hoefler
2010-10-07 22:10 ` michael bode
2010-10-07 22:37 ` Jeffrey Carter
2010-10-08 5:18 ` michael bode [this message]
2010-10-08 10:13 ` michael bode
2010-10-08 0:15 ` Randy Brukardt
2010-10-08 5:33 ` michael bode
2010-10-09 6:42 ` Randy Brukardt
2010-10-09 8:18 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2010-10-26 1:50 ` Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)
2010-10-08 7:54 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox