From: tdu AT enter DOT net (Tim Updegrove) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: uclock erratic Message-ID: <391222c5.362265@news.enter.net> 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 NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.16.154.87 X-Complaints-To: Abuse Role , We Care X-Trace: monger.newsread.com 957490492 207.16.154.87 (Thu, 04 May 2000 21:34:52 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 21:34:52 EDT Organization: ENTER.net (enter.net) 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?