Sure, and I see I have made a mistake in my first description .. I meant
to say 'mode' not 'period'
Timer1
Timer2.Mode = 0
Doing some code now which may be longer than the period of 2,
but it'll just have to wait
Timer2.Mode = 2
Timer2
Timer1.Mode = 0
Doing some code now which may be longer than the period of 1,
but it'll just have to wait
Timer1.Mode = 2
How long it gets tied up in each timer isn't so important, but there may
be as many as 15+
and the distribution of the time amongst them (in other words the ratio
of their periods)
is what matters to me, that and to ensure that only ever one fires at a
time. Oh actually
I see I haven't quite thought this through .. apologies - I don't want
any timer to fire
(or re-fire) while one of them is busy.
Hrm Ok I'll research the archives and/or forums ahead of time before
posting in future !
James
Hello List !
I was pondering to create a little utility application for myself,
and have many repeating timers, at various intervals.
I'm not sure this'll quite work as I'm thinking, but in the code
for each timer, if I set the period=0 for every -other-
timer, and then re-enable them to 2 at the end, will this ensure
that only ever 1 timer at a time is firing ?
(Using RB 5.5.5 and/or 2005R4 on WinXP)
Also hopefully I have sent my inquiry to the correct list, any and
all feedback welcome !
This list is fine. It is hard, however, to guess what will happen
with this limited explanation.
The timer should operate the same on 5.5.5 and 200x.
Perhaps you could explain your purpose in using these timers and
provide a simple code example for two timers.
Terry
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
