On Thursday, July 10, 2003, at 11:38 AM, Ken Ray wrote:
What wimpy OS are you using? ;-)
You're right! It's OS-dependent. The "wimpy" OS was Windows XP; I checked it on my Mac (same config as yours) and I get the extra microseconds. Cool!
It might not be XP's fault. I have used NT and Win2K system calls that had nanosecond resolution. This does not mean the OS or the hardware can handle that, but it does hint at greater time resolution (smaller than ms).
The same engine is used for all supported Windows platforms, whether 95/98/NT/2000/Me/XP, whether home, pro or server. I imagine parts of the engine might use the reduced common capability and parts might make runtime decisions based on the OS. Perhaps the long seconds is in the first part.
I, personally, wouldn't mind if the Windows engine split into two if the 2K and XP Pro got some improvement or features.
BTW, the microseconds in OS X (and, it seems from Ray's comments, Mac OS 9.2) are handy for timing operations when using a repeat loop is awkward or otherwise inappropriate.
Dar Scott
_______________________________________________ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
