Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Faster than 40d, no problems

42 (26.1%)

Faster than 40d, problems

72 (44.7%)

No slower than 40d, no problems

14 (8.7%)

No slower than 40d, problems

16 (9.9%)

Slower than 40d, no problems

2 (1.2%)

Slower than 40d, problems

3 (1.9%)

Doesn't work (please explain)

12 (7.5%)

Total Members Voted: 160

[userpay]

This is c++ right? I've done a brief class in c++ and I just finished another class (equally brief) in python with java programing in the second semester. What exactly does this program do? I'm curious.

It was just to demonstrate that a call to Sleep(1) is not always equivalent to a call to Sleep(10) on Windows (that is, Sleep(1) does not always last at least 10 milliseconds).  That is the default behavior, but this behavior can be changed on any system that supports a timer resolution smaller than 10 milliseconds.  The short program I listed simply finds out what the smallest timer resolution the computer supports is, tells the machine to use this timer resolution, and then finds out how long it takes to call Sleep(1) ten thousand times.  Optimally, it should take a little over 10 seconds to execute.  On systems that only support 10 millisecond sleeps, it should instead take around 100 seconds.

Hmm interesting, I may use this later on just to see what my comp can do. Its funny though how similar python and c++ is though, just changing certain words around and its the same structure. I was always the first done in my class thanks to the c++. When school starts back up I'l see if I can convert it to python or something.

[Baughn]

There are a lot more differences, but it's true that Python and C++ are rather similar.

You should try Haskell sometime. My favorite language, and a real brain-bender if all you know is Python.

Also, it's not "what's the fastest timer my computer supports", it's "what's the fastest timer windows supports on this computer". Linux manages to sleep at a resolution of a few hundred microseconds just fine; better than that, if I set the right kernel options and set the application to realtime.

[Baughn]

One last time then.

Assuming everything works now.. the latest version has optimizations turned on. Have a look, see how it works.

EDIT: Oh, and the mouse texture should work. Works here, at any rate.

[jarathor]

Hey - I just tried to use the new windows version, and it won't run - I'm getting an error that says the application coniguration is incorrect - also, there are several files (including readme.linux, distribute.linux, and build.linux) that are .linux files - Is it possible that the download link could be wrong? And yes, I did make sure I clicked on the windows version. Am I missing something?

[Baughn]

I may have mixed configurations on the latest one, yep. Let me have a look.

[Baughn]

Yep. Should work now, though.

[savanik]

Not if it works. Well, I guess all's good then - is anyone still having problems?

About the shm_open errors:
A number of linux applications expect to be able to open temporary files in /dev/shm/, which should be a directory like /tmp except using a ramdisk, not the actual HD. Your system appears to have the wrong permissions for that mount; it should have all permissions set (777), plus the sticky bit. Like /tmp.

As you can see, though, it falls back nicely to, presumably, /tmp, so no big deal.

Hmm. The /dev/shm directory has drwxrwxrwt permissions (777 plus sticky) so that's not it. I can write to the directory that bc is in, so that's not either.

Oh, well. Not that big of a deal to me. I'll put the new version through it's paces on my system a little later, mucking around with the graphics mode some more.

[Baughn]

Actually, you need the MSVC2008 runtime. Most of you probably already have this. It really should be bundled with BC, but it's a bit large, so..

[Thndr]

Is there anything specific we should inform you of if it works? Or do we just post a bunch of framerates and such?

[Baughn]

You don't actually have to inform me of anything; only *errors* really matter. Telling me four-digit framerates is good for my soul, though. ^_^

[Christes]

This is totally nuts.

running at double size (160x50), I can't get it under 1000 FPS no matter how much I put up on the screen.  I could easily drop it to like 50 FPS in the earlier version.

[Baughn]

All right, looks like we're getting a re-release of 40d pretty soon with my code in it. More testing, plus it'll be a nice christmas present, don't you think? ^_^

I'll leave the rest to toady for now.

[Tormy]

All right, looks like we're getting a re-release of 40d pretty soon with my code in it. More testing, plus it'll be a nice christmas present, don't you think? ^_^

I'll leave the rest to toady for now.

Sounds neat. This means that we gonna have much more FPS in DF also?

[Baughn]

That's the idea. Probably not thousands, but some of you will get a doubling or more. Mostly the ones with low FPS to begin with.

[Tormy]

That's the idea. Probably not thousands, but some of you will get a doubling or more. Mostly the ones with low FPS to begin with.

Pure awesomeness. Thanks a lot for making DF even better.