Thanks for the quick response.

> I have a specific application that requires better timing than sleep()
> can provide, so I need the original busy-wait solution or something very
> close to it.  I don't mind adding a sleep() based throttling mechanism
> as well, but people who use it need to realize it's limitations.

I understand that.  I'm not looking to change the FlightGear
baseline...just a solution that does what I need.

How precise is the timing of the naitive-gui ?  If I have my
simulation use a blocking socket to receive messages, this can provide
the interrupt to schedule my simulation.  The only problem there would
be that if a packet is dropped, the simulation will miss a frame
(unlikely if they're on the same PC).  Does native-gui run in its own
thread, or is it limited to FlightGear's frame rate?

I'm just brainstorming here...I still don't know what my ideal solution is.


Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to