Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From:	ejrh AT paradise DOT net DOT nz
Subject:	Re: Signal handling in tight loops
Date:	Tue, 7 Aug 2001 23:33:07 GMT
X-Mailer:	Endymion MailMan Standard Edition v3.0.26
Message-Id:	<20010807233307.3FC3F1F9E2D@deborah.paradise.net.nz>

> Why don't you write a simple test case?

Because I am at work where I don't have cygwin, or any compiler of any 
form for that matter.

> This technique should be much more useful than inviting random opinions
> from a mailing list and it should be MUCH faster.

I've only had one random opinion so far.  :)

Original question:
> > the alarm signal could not be raised in very tight loops, because
> > signals were only checked when memory was accessed.  Does this apply
> > to cygwin, by any chance?



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -