• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: creating multiple NSTimers
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: creating multiple NSTimers


  • Subject: Re: creating multiple NSTimers
  • From: Conrad Shultz <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:19:54 -0700

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 9/29/11 10:50 PM, Greg Guerin wrote:
> Gordon Apple wrote:
>
>> There must already be an array for the table, so just iterate
>> the
> array every
>> minute or whatever (single repeating timer), compare the times to
>> [NSDate date} and start or shut down whatever has not been
>> started or shut
> down.  Much
>> easier than trying to manage timers.
>
> You don't have to iterate the whole array, either.  Sort it by
> ascending order of turn-off time.  Keep a current position (index).
> If the time of day is less than the turn-off time of the device at
> the current position, do nothing.  If time of day >= turn-off time
> of current position, then turn it off and advance position until
> time of day is again less than the turn-off time of device at the
> current position. Only needs one timer, and scales to as large an
> array as you want to keep.

I don't really see how this is superior to keeping the one timer per
remote box.

When the user updates a timer, one is forced to re-sort the array and
reposition the index (under the above implementation).

One would also have to implement the scheme carefully, particularly if
the shut-off code is offloaded onto separate threads, to avoid
potential race conditions arising from a user changing a fire date in
the middle of a shut-off sequence.

And as Graham mentioned, polling is probably less CPU and power
efficient than using timers anyway.

Am I missing something conceptually here?  Why are people pushing for
the single timer model?  Is there some hidden complexity in a
multi-timer approach that I'm not seeing?


- --
Conrad Shultz

Synthetiq Solutions
www.synthetiqsolutions.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk6FbZoACgkQaOlrz5+0JdUAuQCcC3cpCXFJSa7/AMJcrca7l749
1zcAn1tM1yHYuZkoZhvCMPVdAA1UBX4u
=tv8r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________

Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)

Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com

Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: creating multiple NSTimers
      • From: Thomas Davie <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: creating multiple NSTimers (From: Greg Guerin <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Core Data : Undo Delete : Cannot fulfill a fault
  • Next by Date: Re: creating multiple NSTimers
  • Previous by thread: Re: creating multiple NSTimers
  • Next by thread: Re: creating multiple NSTimers
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread