Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 01:06:36 12/14/99
Go up one level in this thread
Hi On December 13, 1999 at 23:10:31, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On December 13, 1999 at 18:39:25, Dann Corbit wrote: >>If you are running other threads of execution on your system, it won't be very >>accurate, since clock() returns time slices given to the process only, not wall >>time. However, if you start the process in high priority, it will be pretty >>close. Unfortunately, high resolution timers are not very portable, and you >>usually end up writing them one by one for each new system. > >If we were talking about UNIX, I would agree with you. But instead we're talking >about the Mac OS, which is so bloody retarded that I would be surprised if it >could tell how much time a "process" got. It doesn't even have preemptive >multitasking, and it most certainly can't assign priorities to processes. > >(Of course, I'm talking about OS9 and not OSX. OSX rocks.) I ran the program with all extensions turned off and nothing else running. (except for Finder of course) So I think I'm on the safe side here. I'd love to change this clock() thingy with something more accurate, but I didn't find anything better so far. Of course there has to be something more accurate, otherwise profiling wouldn't be fun. =) And yes, MacOSX will rock. :) Kind regards, -sargon
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.