From: Russell Hind (rhind_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-19 11:29:44
Anthony Williams wrote:
> Yes, that's what the ASSERT checks. How often do you schedule a software event
> for 40+ days into the future?
Sorry, missed that line.
> Yes. I expect that the wrap-around for that is longer, since it is
> 64-bit. Even if it is set to the processor speed, on a 4Ghz CPU you would
> still have 2^32 seconds, which is a good few years. I can't imagine there are
> any systems where the resolution is better than the CPU frequency (what good
> would it do?). There doesn't seem to be any comment about the minimum
> resolution, but I guess it should be at least as good as GetTickCount,
> otherwise it wouldn't qualify for High Performance.
> It's slightly more work to use due to the system variability, but not a lot.
I didn't know if the performance counters would give any advantage, just
thought I'd point them out as an alternative to that could be used and
see if anyone had any opinions either way. IMHO, GetTickCount is fine
for what we use it for.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk