Re: Another Tricky Problem I am Messing With (Not Homework)

On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:03:28 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Bill Reid"
<hormelfree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Well, if the program is suspended, it's not using processor time,
and it's not "running", now is it?

Bizarre - thats precisely what we've all been trying to explain to
you. However the way you phrased the original statement led me to
believe you thought it told you how long had elapsed on the wall clock
since you started the programme.

I assume you're not used to multitasking operating systems.

Actually, it might be more true that I've forgotten more
about multi-tasking, multi-user, multi-processor systems
than you'll ever know...

I sincerely doubt that, but I'm unlikely to ever care enough to test
it.

Its possible, but since its a nonstandard function, we can't say.

We can't even make an educated "guess"?

Why? Since when did this become comp.lang.allsortsotstuffabitlikec

when you're running this process, it takes 100% of hte CPU
available for the duration of hte "busy wait" loop.

Now let's just think about this for a second...you "guess" that
the "sleep" function bumps the CPU usage of the process up to
100% for the duration of the "sleep" on a "multi-tasking" system

Oh, I'm sorry. I *thought* you were claiming that your clock()
function was returning the wall clock time between two points in time,
irrespective of whether anything else was running on the box. Now you
seem in fact to be claiming quite the reverse. Perhaps I'll just
ignore you till you make up your minds.

(the exact kind of system you are an "expert" on!).

I have at no stage claimed to be an "expert" (your quotes).

And yet, it seems to ignorant me that a "multi-tasking" single
processor system must always be stopping execution of processes
to allow other processes to get their share of "CPU time", to
create this "illusion" that they are all "running" at the same time.

No ***, sherlock?

(snip ramblings )

Try running a huge
numerical simulation at the same time, say BOINC or converting a nice
big AVI into MPG.

You snipped out (classic behavior) my description of what I did,

ah, I see - you're more interested in taking offense at people
pointing out errors in your logic than in understanding.

programs; in fact, I run a HUGE numerical simulation every night
that takes everything my poor little computer has to offer

<irony>
Yeah., and I have babes just begging to be rogered every night, due to
the enormous size of my tackle.
</irony>

Yup, spoken like a true "professional"...

My mistake - i thought you wanted help. Apparently you just want
blown.
--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
.

Quantcast