Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 13:47:04 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: "Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" <salvador AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
cc: Adam Schrotenboer <ajschrotenboer AT lycosmail DOT com>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: __dpmi_yield
In-Reply-To: <m10XtMi-000S8aC@inti.gov.ar>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990418134638.22615G-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 15 Apr 1999, Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET) wrote:

> I doubt sleep can be easilly hacked to do 
> what is supposed to do and call __dpmi_yield.

Surprise! `sleep' already calls `__dpmi_yield'.  All functions that
waste time in busy-waiting loops call `__dpmi_yield' in DJGPP.  In
fact, if you ever see a function that doesn't, please report that as a
bug.