Date:	Tue, 16 Feb 1999 17:59:08 -0500
Message-Id:	<199902162259.RAA07043@envy.delorie.com>
From:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<7acr2v$ht7$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> (message from beergod on Tue,
	16 Feb 1999 22:22:33 GMT)
Subject:	Re: need to use the timer
References:	<8D53104ECD0CD211AF4000A0C9D60AE3535851 AT probe-2 DOT acclaim-euro DOT net> <7aajof$jnv$1 AT nnrp1 DOT dejanews DOT com> <199902160239 DOT VAA29017 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <7acr2v$ht7$1 AT nnrp1 DOT dejanews DOT com>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> > differences would (as long as the differences were less than, say,
> > 20-30 years :)
> ok thanks.... and i doubt that that will be a problem...

A 32-bit variable storing the results of uclock (which *should* be
64-bit) would do this every 3600 seconds, or about once an hour.
While this would be "bad programming practice" it might be appropriate
due to speed and/or timing concerns, and you'd have to worry about
negative values.

- Raw text -