Re: [AD] rest and yield_timeslice

[Angelo Mottola <a.mottola@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> There was already a discussion about this - but somehow it was only
> about yield_timeslice and my "al_sleep", and rest was mostly left out 
> of
> it. After some discussion in #allegro today I got convinced that a
> better idea would have been to just use rest() as function to give up
> time.

I second all this.
Let me add the timer drivers already feature a rest() hook, even though 
as already stated not all drivers implement it.
If we can get all drivers to provide it, we could use rest() with the 
following declared new behaviour: rest(n) waits n milliseconds, with 
accurate timing if possible, and gives up CPU cycles during the wait if 
possible.

This new rest() could be even used in place of the current new 
yield_timeslice() which was modified to actually sleep, and that some 
people never liked here... We could modify yield_timeslice() to just 
call the new rest() passing 0 as argument, as most systems do a context 
switch when calling a sleep function.

--
Angelo Mottola
a.mottola@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.ecplusplus.com