For posterity. -- Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org ) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com ) -- "If I was modest, I'd be perfect." -Ted Turner
Laine Stump wrote: > I just patched the WinNT files to use a "kind of" usleep (the WinAPI > Sleep() function is in milliseconds, so I have to divide by 1000). I > thought of using select() instead, but that would require #including > winsock2.h, which might have been ugly. According to the Linux nanosleep man page, due to the current accuracy of the system timer, Intel machines only have an accuracy of 10ms and Alpha of 1ms, anyhow. > + Sleep(useconds/1000); I changed this line to Sleep(useconds/1000 + (useconds%1000 ? 1 : 0)); It more closely matches the Linux definition of nanosleep (sleeping _at least_ X seconds, barring interrupts). Linux usleep didn't specify which direction error would be in, but I thought this made sense. Besides, it rounds up now, making it impossible to get zero by accident. Checked in. Derek -- Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org ) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com ) -- Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
