Re: Polling, Interrupts, DMA, Synchronous, Asynchronous I/O Definitions

From: Jim Carlock (anonymous_at_127.0.0.1)
Date: 07/15/04 

Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 03:18:19 GMT

"Frank Kotler" wrote:
> In any case, this discussion prompts a philosophical question for
> the LuxAsm team... If it were possible to speed up LuxAsm by
> being "inconsiderate" and hogging resources, would this be an
> acceptable method of speeding up LuxAsm? (I suppose the
> answer depends on "how much?"...)

I'm seeing mention of Interrupts... which may or may not be
hardware requests for attention. And with the definitions of polling,
I'll add another definition to interrupts... I translate most into an
Event... and from what I see, I see a lot of passing control to the
OS via DoEvents in timer operations or in waiting for info routines.
The DoEvents in VB programming passes some kind of control
to the operating system and that's how you'd get a processor
intensive routine to return control to the OS. I put in an infinite
loop in one app on an XP machine and without the DoEvents
control the App took a second or two to close down, but with
the DoEvents, it responded immediately.

I've tried to follow what a DoEvents exactly is but it's beyond
my current current attention span. If you'd like a copy of a program
that goes into an infinite loop with the DoEvents code in it, I
can send you a copy. You'll need a Windows machine and
the VB runtimes. :-) 

-- 
Jim Carlock
http://www.911forthetruth.com/
Post replies to the newsgroup.