Message-ID: <431F9FD6.5030609 at rftp.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 19:20:06 -0700
From: Robert Roessler <robertr at rftp.com>
Organization: Robert's High-performance Software
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Olivier Andrieu <andrieu at ijm.jussieu.fr>
CC: lablgtk at math.nagoya-u.ac.jp
Subject: Re: Timeout (windows/linux comparison)
References: <431D8AA6.20102 at laposte.net>	<431E7655.1020204 at rftp.com> <17183.23538.261931.923821 at karryall.dnsalias.org>
In-Reply-To: <17183.23538.261931.923821 at karryall.dnsalias.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Olivier Andrieu wrote:

>  Robert Roessler [Tuesday 6 September 2005] :
>  >
>  > Since it is not clear if this granularity is due to the timeout
>  > facility implementation or to gettimeofday itself, I then tried to
>  > run timeouts with smaller intervals and use GLib GTimers for higher
>  > accuracy in the time *measurement*... and found that GTimers do not
>  > appear to be wrapped by LablGTK (at least as of the last CVS
>  > snapshot of 7/1). :(
> 
> Well, GTimer just seem to provide the same functionality as
> Unix.gettimeofday (platform-independant time querying), so it did not
> seem very important to wrap them.

Hmmm... while it does indeed provide "platform-independent time 
querying", the GTimer facilities are very much about *high-precision* 
time querying - so (not being up in GLib internals or the Win32 
version thereof) I could at least hope that the GTimer implementation 
would reflect that orientation - and possibly even use different 
system API calls to that end.

Robert Roessler
robertr@rftp.com
http://www.rftp.com