🚀 go-pugleaf

"Francisco Villa" <nospam_francisco_destel@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I undersatand that the thread suspend execution but there is much diference.

Windows is really not suitable for real-time operations - it's not
designed for it at all.

>However this method consumes too much CPU %.

A busy wait will do - that's why you should only use it if nothing else
works. If the amount of CPU it uses is a problem, then it's likely that
there's too much going on elsewhere for anything vaguely resembling
real-time to work.

However ... if you have a look at the Multimedia Timer area
(timeSetEvent and so on), you should be able to get something far more
precise, since that API has to support stuff that uses much shorter
intervals at much more precise intervals. It won't be perfect (hey, even
my dual Athlon machines won't play DVDs happily while I'm also doing
multiple compiles and net downloads), but I guess it's what you should
be trying for.

Further advice I can't give - I've not actually done this myself.

Alan Bellingham
-- 
ACCU Conference 2005 - 20-23 April, Randolph Hotel, Oxford, UK