On 04/05/2010 08:56 AM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
>>> - QueryPerformanceCounter [1] has a resolution of 0.5 ms or higher.
>>
>> ... if you use it, then you run into the issues of file timestamp mismatch
>> (cygwin currently has a known issue where, because it uses
>> QueryPerformanceCount
Hi Eric,
> > - QueryPerformanceCounter [1] has a resolution of 0.5 ms or higher.
>
> ... if you use it, then you run into the issues of file timestamp mismatch
> (cygwin currently has a known issue where, because it uses
> QueryPerformanceCounter instead of GetSystemTimeAsFileTime for
> impleme
On 04/04/2010 04:41 AM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just a side note about how to measure elapsed time on mingw.
> (I needed this in order to evaluate how to implement nanosleep on mingw.)
>
> Summary:
> - GetSystemTimeAsFileTime, _ftime, gettimeofday (from newer mingw runtimes)
> all hav
Hi,
Just a side note about how to measure elapsed time on mingw.
(I needed this in order to evaluate how to implement nanosleep on mingw.)
Summary:
- GetSystemTimeAsFileTime, _ftime, gettimeofday (from newer mingw runtimes)
all have about 15.6 ms resolution.
- QueryPerformanceCounter [1]