Hi, this appears not to have been received by Listar... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 18:25:40 +0200 (MET DST) From: Christoph Reichenbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Alexander R Angas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: process_sound_events() Hi, > I was just looking at process_sound_events() which receives signals back > from the sound server. It appears to be called in a fairly arbitrary > fashion. Am I correct on this? Yes. It's called in a number of kernel functions that are known to be used regularly (particularly Wait, DoSound, and Animate). > If so, is there any way it can be improved? We can't do asynchronous stuff portably here, since heap reads/writes are not atomic on some machines and mutexes would be overkill. A possible improvement would be to use a counter that calls process_sound_events() every 250 instructions or so, in addition to the current calls (DoSound tends to trigger sound events that can be processed immediately after it has sent its commands, whereas Wait and Animate may take some time and are therefore good places for checks. llap, Christoph
