Unruh wrote: > Juergen Kosel <[email protected]> writes: > >>Hello, > >>Harlan Stenn schrieb: >>>>>> In article <[email protected]>, Juergen Kosel >>>>>> <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>> And I also don't understand what you mean by "computing time is a >>> concern". Is the overhead of a subroutine call that significant in your >>> application? > >>it would be a waste of computing time to convert the reference clock >>time into the format guessed year, month day, hour, ... to call the >>subroutine refclock_process(), which would convert it back. > > Oh dear. The time taken is about 1 ns on amodern CPU. Instead you waste > seconds and possibly hours drinking your coffee and chatting to friends > while you r computer waits for you, and you are worried about ns in order > to make an orderly API for the refclocks. > > > > >>Greetings >>Juergen
Uh-Oh... Moore's law: the transistor density on chips roughly doubles every two years. Wirth's law: The software decelerates faster than the hardware accelerates. So basically I'm trying to be conservative with my CPU ressources (and 15 years of embedded system programming *might* have to with it), but I think the Juergen Kosel had something different in mind: inaccuracies because of processing delays. But the point is that once you have the sample pair (clock time and associated local time) you have nearly all the time in the world to process it. It's the acquisition delay variance that kills, not the processing that follows. -- juergen 'pearly' perlinger "It's hard to make new errors!" _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
