Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/05/04/21:17:10

From: tdu AT enter DOT net (Tim Updegrove)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: uclock erratic
Message-ID: <>
References: <3910c80d DOT 139960 AT news DOT enter DOT net>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.11/32.235
Lines: 11
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 01:34:52 GMT
X-Complaints-To: Abuse Role <abuse AT enter DOT net>, We Care <abuse AT newsread DOT com>
X-Trace: 957490492 (Thu, 04 May 2000 21:34:52 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 21:34:52 EDT
Organization: (
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Thank-you DJ and Eli for pointing me to version 2.03.  It seems to
have fixed my problem.

I have a related question or two.  First, will uclock be reliable in
Windows 98 SE?  If no, is clock() reliable in Windows 98 SE?

Lastly, I'm using uclock() to provide a delay or wait function.  I
just noticed usleep() in the archives last night.  Should I be using
this function instead of uclock to provide a delay?  If yes, is usleep
reliable in Windows 98 SE?

- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019