On 2/3/12 11:46 AM, Nick Raptis wrote:
> So, it seems to not matter that much after all. If anything, your
> implementation is consistent across platforms.

Ok then. :)

> Anyway, just for fun, I'm attaching a naive diff against r7606 of what
> it would take to have a Timer that both doesn't drift AND doesn't miss
> hits (not sure if the latter is at all desirable though).

Have you tested this on Linux and Windows and confirm both lack of drift and no 
missed calls?

Note that one feature of callAfterInterval() is to keep multiple calls from 
occuring. 
So if callAfterInterval() is called again for the same function and args before 
the 
first interval has fired, the original is discarded and now we wait for the 
current-call's interval.

Paul

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev
Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-dev
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[email protected]

Reply via email to