Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- From: Frank Kotler <fbkotler@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 14:50:27 -0400
Beth wrote:
You've shown before that you don't entirely grasp how the "priority" scheduling scheme in Windows works, hutch...and you're doing it again, it seems...
It's my understanding that Hutch knows perfectly well that a polling loop is a very "inconsiderate" thing to do in a multi-tasking OS. But the blocking alternative crashes on certain hardware/version combinations. (I guess there's some question if this is true or not, but that's why Hutch does it that way... I understand)
The polling loop isn't getting 100% CPU time because there's a "sleep" in the loop. (again, some controversy whether it should be "sleep 0" or "sleep 1", I guess...)
Being a fairly deviant antique myself, I'm running a k6-300 (no -2), and can (if I must) boot Win98 (no se, I don't think). If that combination would reliably demonstrate the problem, perhaps I could check it out (haven't tried it). If some workaround for this bug could be found *other* than a polling loop, that would be "better", IMHO, but perhaps there isn't one...
If the "blocking" alternative fails because of a bug, what would *you* do?
Best, Frank .
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- From: Beth
- Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- From: hutch--
- Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- From: f0dder
- Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- From: Alex McDonald
- Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- References:
- The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- From: hutch--
- Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- From: Beth
- The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- Prev by Date: Re: model of Z
- Next by Date: Re: model of Z
- Previous by thread: Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- Next by thread: Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|