I just have a few questions about the 'Sleep' function.
1. Is the number an exact time? Or is how long it lasts judged on CPU speed?
2. Is it possible to have a variable in the brackets instead of a number? Like?Code:Sleep(x);
3. (not really related to Sleep) is it possible to create a popup message that opens up over all the other windows? Like a custom error message popup?
Answers appreciated.
1. It is time - but not exact - it will not depend on CPU speed, but will depend on CPu usage by other thread/processes, so Sleep can take more when askedOriginally Posted by bradszy
I just have a few questions about the 'Sleep' function.
1. Is the number an exact time? Or is how long it lasts judged on CPU speed?
2. Is it possible to have a variable in the brackets instead of a number? Like?Code:Sleep(x);
3. (not really related to Sleep) is it possible to create a popup message that opens up over all the other windows? Like a custom error message popup?
Answers appreciated.
Also Sleep(1) will probably take about 15 ms because it is the "real" resolution of Sleep
2. Yes, as any other function
3. System Modal dialog?
Such posts are really should be done on Windows programming - because Sleep and Messagebox are Windows specific
All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection,
except for the problem of too many layers of indirection.
– David J. Wheeler
I agree this should be in a windows programming forum, not C++.
The resolution of Sleep() is actually CPU dependent. 15ms is a rule of thumb for some older processors, assuming a single processor machine.
The literal working of Sleep() is that it causes the calling thread to yield it's timeslice, and the windows scheduler does not allocate another timeslice during the specified period. So, the argument of Sleep() specifies an approximate lower bound on the time a thread is effectively suspended. The scheduler may elect not to allocate a timeslice (eg if there is significant demand from higher priority threads) so, theoretically, there is no upper bound.
1) In other words, the OS puts the thread to sleep for a minimum of the time specified. Once the time is up, normal scheduling resumes, which means that your thread is woken up whenever the OS feels like it - if a high-priority process is hogging the CPU, that may not be for a long time.
And yes, Windows board.
All the buzzt!
CornedBee
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
- Flon's Law
Thanks guys, but 1 more thing, is it possible to use both MB_ICONWARNING and MB_SYSTEMMODAL together? Like having the warning icon as well as having system modal properties? Thanks again.
Have you tried?
You link the flags with the bitwise or operator |.
All the buzzt!
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
- Flon's Law
Sleep can also sleep less than the specified interval in some cases. But it sleeps roughly the amount of time specified by the code. And of course you can pass a variable with the time to the function.
It can?
All the buzzt!
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
- Flon's Law
I actually complained to Microsoft about the inconsistencies of the Sleep documentation, but under remarks on MSDN, you'll find:
If dwMilliseconds is less than the resolution of the system clock, the thread may sleep for less than the specified length of time.
I see. Interesting.
All the buzzt!
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
- Flon's Law
Sleep() is good enough for most applications, however for multimedia purposes (say you're making a media player) you're probably going to need a higher-resolution timer. The multimedia timer functions will go some way to accomplishing that (Unless Raymond Chen has said anything different, it is independent of the task scheduler).
On modern processors you can also use the performance counter.
I tested it on my PC while switching ie pages, opening folders, opening Photo Shop CS3,and it gave me EXACTLY 1 minute... I know the results will vary from PC to PC, but it's consistent enough.
Also, corned, you were right, I had to put | in between them. Thanks everyone, my problems are solved.
Oh but a minute is a lot of milliseconds. It works on milliseconds, so it can be pretty consistent there.
It's 60 000 milliseconds, so it's not exactly that difficult to reach that target. Plus it probably overslept some milliseconds too.
Did you check that?
How would I check that?
<ctime> will be of use to you.
