🚀 go-pugleaf

SLMYQ@USU.BITNET writes:
>> I was wondering if there was a friendly way for an amiga Process to
>>Sleep for a period of time (in C).  Currently to sleep for say,
>>1 second I do a
>>
>>for(i=0;i<50;i++)
>> WaitTOF();
>>
>>Is there a better, possibly more precise way of waiting for a period
>>of time without hogging the CPU.
>
>       [Deleted explanation of Delay]
>
>You might want to open up the timer.device directly, but the only advantage
>this would give is you could do something else while it's "ticking" - it's
>asynchronous.  You can use this method within tasks as well as processes,
>but if you just want a synchronous wait within a task, using WaitTOF()
>is probably better.
>
>>Thanks
>>-Roger
>
>                                Bryan

        Hmm,  Does WaitTOF() free the CPU for other tasks?  I never use it.
      If you can arrange to never be drawing into the current displayed bitmap
      you should never need it, which is what I do.

        I think the timer device is the way to go.  Set up the timer to
      genrate a software interrupt to restart your task.  There are dozens
      of ways to construct such a setup, depending on your needs and the
      accuracy of the timing desired.  This will be more complicated but will
      allow much more flexable control of the system.

                                                        Good Luck,

                                                                Wade.

        PS: If Delay() does indeed cause damage to disks if a 0 is passed
              wouldn't it make sense to either not use it or encapuslate
              it within a procedure which ensures a non-zero input?


UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!haitex
ARPA: crash!pnet01!haitex@nosc.mil
INET: haitex@pnet01.CTS.COM