From: sparhawk AT eunet DOT at (Gerhard Gruber) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: bash eats cycles Date: Sun, 05 Jul 1998 18:01:17 GMT Organization: Customer of EUnet Austria Message-ID: <35a7b81a.4043791@news.Austria.EU.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: e198.dynamic.vienna.at.eu.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 39 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk Destination: Eli Zaretskii From: Gruber Gerhard Group: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 16:37:36 +0300 (IDT): >On Thu, 2 Jul 1998, Gerhard W. Gruber wrote: > >> It's NTVDM.EXE that takes all the time. I think that is the subssystem that manages 80x86 virtual machines (but I'm not sure on this). At least all 16bit applications run under this. >What's this? (I'm not an NT guru, so go slow on me ;-). Me neither. :) The longer I'm forced to work with it the less I like it. :) >No, AFAIK Bash doesn't know when you minimize its window. It seems like >NT itself doesn't give Bash any cycles because it NT knows it's minimized, >that's why minimizing the window remedies the situation. That's possible. I'm not sure if a DOS programm could even be aware of max-/minimizing a DOS window. >No, you don't. You can write a simple program that waits for keys in a >loop that calls __dpmi_yield when kbhit returns zero. You can link this >program once with the version of __dpmi_yield in the library and once >with the version I sent, and compare the CPU load imposed by both >programs. That's a good idea. I'll try it out tomorrow. -- Bye, Gerhard email: sparhawk AT eunet DOT at g DOT gruber AT sis DOT co DOT at Spelling corrections are appreciated.