Re: [AD] Add timeBeginPeriod(1) to wtimer.c

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives ]


> > Ideally, we would either find a document describing the implications
> of
> > timeBeginPeriod(1), or have some more test results.
>
>
> all my net research has not found a single thing that mentions adverse
> effects.

Well, there's nothing like empirical tests to check if a theory is accurate
;)

> i dont think the overhead is all that much.
> its a cost worth paying, if its going to give us 1ms accuracy.

I don't know. Personally, I don't really care if the timer is accurate to
1ms or 10ms...

> if we find its slow on a 300mhz machine, yet is fast on a 3ghz machine..
>   do we go with it or not?   personally im <rant> sick of pandering to
> almost obsolete archetectures</rant> and  propose that if it doesn't get
> included because of slower archectures, that it gets included inside a
> some type of  #ifdef INCLUDE_PERFORMANCE_CODE

Well, first, 300MHz isn't that obsolete. Second, if it's slightly faster on
a 3GHz machine... well, who cares at that speed? ;)
I'd be opposed to too many #ifdefs in the code with the purpose of
optimization for different machine speeds. It will produce versions of the
DLL that behave differently (which is bad IMO) and it will make the code
less easy to check and bug-clean.

Evert




Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+ http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/