🚀 go-pugleaf

If your machine has is multiprocessor then there is nothing wrong with doing 
your timing in a separate thread with a very high, even real-time priority. 
If you have only a single processor, then you will have issues with starving 
other threads and apps. But in any case you can adjust the priority of the 
thread to a higher value.

Dan

"Charles Hacker" <reply.to@borland.newsgroups> wrote in message 
news:489A7184.365DE8E@borland.newsgroups...
> Roger Lascelles wrote:
>>
>> I recommend you don't  do this. A small microcontroller on a USB or COM 
>> port
>> will do the job perfectly and will work on any PC.
>
> I realise this, and for a dedicated system I would certainly build a
> seperate controller.
>
> However, this is an "Educational Task", to get students to develop a
> "Real-Life" task to control an external device.
> (I am a University lecturer, at Griffith University, Qld Australia).
>
> The control will not be perfect, and will not necessarily be the way to
> go, but it is a task that is possible for students to do.
>
> But in anycase, I was just wondering if there is any way to 'improve'
> the response (though it may never be perfect).
>
> I noticed the 'SetPriorityClass' command, and it has 'Real_Time' Class.
> So anyone know if that is a good way to go?
> Any better (or other) suggestions?
>
> -- 
> Charles Hacker