在 2019/3/2 1:16, LRN 写道:
> On 01.03.2019 17:19, Liu Hao wrote:
>> Wouldn't this be better, saving a call to `_pthread_get_tick_count()` ?
>>
>>
>> (the compound assignment operator seems incorrect).
>>
>
> New version is attached.
>
>
>
> +result = WaitForSingleObject ((HANDLE) handle,
> This can be verified by printing the size of the enclosing struct
> using GCC with our header, then comparing it with the result using
> MSVC and Microsoft header.
Nifty :-) Actually I've believed that **declaration** of nested
structures is just a declaration, and no code/data will be
On 01.03.2019 17:19, Liu Hao wrote:
> Wouldn't this be better, saving a call to `_pthread_get_tick_count()` ?
>
>
> (the compound assignment operator seems incorrect).
>
New version is attached.
From 0d93a97765716b5b642bf39663c5162af3f8ebf5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From:
On 01.03.2019 17:19, Liu Hao wrote:
> 在 2019/3/1 19:08, LRN 写道:
>> New version is attached.
>>
>
>>
>> +result = WaitForMultipleObjects ((DWORD) count, (HANDLE *) handles,
>> all, (DWORD) wait_time);
>> +current_time = _pthread_get_tick_count ();
>> +if (current_time >= end_time ||
在 2019/3/1 15:14, Ruslan Garipov 写道:
>> It looks like we have ended up in a bug there
>
> I don't know :-( To summarize: MSVC, Intel C++ and GCC on Microsoft
> Windows fail to compile that sample C code. But clang for Microsoft
> Windows does compile the code (just like GCC for Linux-based
在 2019/3/1 19:08, LRN 写道:
> New version is attached.
>
>
> +result = WaitForMultipleObjects ((DWORD) count, (HANDLE *) handles, all,
> (DWORD) wait_time);
> +current_time = _pthread_get_tick_count ();
> +if (current_time >= end_time || result != WAIT_TIMEOUT)
> + break;
在 2019/3/1 19:08, LRN 写道:
>
> New version is attached.
>
>
>
OK, pushed this one.
--
Best regards,
LH_Mouse
___
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
On 28/02/2019 21:23, Martin Storsjö wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2019, Liu Hao wrote:
在 2019/2/28 22:57, Jacek Caban 写道:
It could be useful a long time ago for avoiding using APIs that were
new
and not always present back then. Also, back then, most compatibility
functions that we have now were
On 01.03.2019 9:13, Liu Hao wrote:
> 在 2019/3/1 下午1:34, LRN 写道:
>> On 01.03.2019 5:53, Liu Hao wrote:
>>
>> GetTickCount64() then, i guess?
>>
>
> `GetTIckCount64()` for Vista and above or `QueryPerformanceCounter()`
> for XP. I really don't care about XP, since MSYS2 has officially dropped
> XP
On 01.03.2019 5:48, Liu Hao wrote:
> 在 2019/3/1 上午2:09, LRN 写道:
>> If the caller provides ts_nsec in struct timespec,
>> we lose precision when converting that time to milliseconds
>> for our WaitFor*() calls. Make sure we round *up* when doing that
>> conversion, as otherwise the wait time will
10 matches
Mail list logo
