Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 10:32:15 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: kbhit() and SIGALRM
In-Reply-To: <3728b2a4.1601280@noticias.iies.es>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990429103102.6487R-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, 29 Apr 1999, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote:

> So uclock() doesn't always fail under W95. Could anyone
> please tell me when and where uclock() fails ?

Ask Bill Gates ;-)

Allegedly, Windows has a bad habit of reprogramming the timer when it
sees fit, and when that happens after the first call to `uclock'
(which itself reprograms the timer), `uclock' will begin to work
erratically, sometimes reporting negative time intervals (i.e. the
values it returns sometimes go down instead of up).

However, `uclock' works on Windows 95 for me also, or at least I
couldn't catch it red-handed yet.  Others reported consistent
problems.  Go figure.

Needless to say, there's no documentation known to me that explains
all this mess from the Windows' side.