> > I'll confirm that. I recently wrote a script that had to process a lot > > of data, and I added a progress bar as a matter of course. The script > > took 6 seconds to complete. That felt like quite a long time, so I > > started adjusting the progress update to only change every so many > > cycles. The longer between updates, the faster the script ran. Then I > > had an epiphany and removed the progress bar altogether -- and the same > > data got processed in about a dozen milliseconds. The entire lag was the > > progress bar! > > > > Rev is so fast, sometimes you forget. > > Hummm... maybe I better rethink adding the progress bar entirely and > stick with the occasional label field updates. =/
Don't forget that not all computers are fast especially as the user may be doing something else that is grabbing a lot of the CPU at the time. I prefer Richard's method of occasional progress bar updates. Unless you are sure that the process will be extremely quick in all circumstances, removing the progress bar may not be a good solution. Cheers, Sarah _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
