Re: mach_absolute_time() vs. sleep()
Re: mach_absolute_time() vs. sleep()
- Subject: Re: mach_absolute_time() vs. sleep()
- From: Kristopher Matthews <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:34:10 -0500
Care to elaborate? This code works fine in all circumstances where
sleep() is not called.
On Apr 30, 2008, at 3:30 PM, Terry Lambert wrote:
On Apr 30, 2008, at 4:13 AM, Kristopher Matthews wrote:
If you see my followup message, I wrote the sample code for this
email incorrectly. My apologies. :)
It should be:
double mach_elapsed_time(uint64_t start, uint64_t endTime)
{
You are doing a couple of really simple things wrong, but the worst
is being wrong about operator precedence order in C.
-- Terry
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden