2010/2/27 Rob Hamerling <[email protected]>: > > > Joep Suijs wrote: >> >> Or don't you agree delay_1ms(500) or delay_100ms(5) easier to read then >> _usec_delay(500000) ? > > If readability is an issue, an alternative is: _usec_delay(500_000), or for > 5 seconds: _usec_delay(5_000_000). > Sure... I guess the balance is no promotion of delay.jal in jallib samples... :(
Joep -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
