Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 07:12:42 -0500
Message-Id: <199702161212.HAA10141@delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
CC: itmiller AT dra DOT hmg DOT gb, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970216085938.14977A-100000@is> (message from Eli
	Zaretskii on Sun, 16 Feb 1997 09:02:21 +0200 (IST))
Subject: Re: Exact timming II


> Will somebody who sees these problems please try debugging them?  
> `uclock' works on MSDOS (at least for me), so I suspect that something in 
> it is incompatible with Windows.  It reprograms the system timer, but 
> that in itself doesn't necessarily mean that it shouldn't work.

uclock() will give negative numbers if the OS prevents it from
reprogramming the timer chip (or resets it).  The default clocking
mode is a stupid 50% duty cycle that doesn't count linearly (it counts
even numbers up to N, then triggers, then goes back and counts the odd
numbers up to N, then resets).

There is no way to get a meaningful result in this mode, and the clock
works just fine in the other mode (count to N then pulse-trigger).