Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!usc!csun!Twg-S5!abcscnuk
From: abcscnuk@Twg-S5.uucp (Naoto Kimura (ACM))
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: Should the PC CLK_TCK really be (1000/55)?
Message-ID: <1990Dec23.182348.21676@csun.edu>
Date: 23 Dec 90 18:23:48 GMT
References: <15779.2770e40e@levels.sait.edu.au> <15780.277225e2@levels.sait.edu.au>
Sender: news@csun.edu (News Administrator)
Organization: csun
Lines: 31

In article <15780.277225e2@levels.sait.edu.au> marwk@levels.sait.edu.au writes:
]In article <15779.2770e40e@levels.sait.edu.au>, marwk@levels.sait.edu.au writes:
]> In time.h in TURBO C 2.0 CLK_TCK is defined to be 18.2.
]> ...
]> Ray
]
]I thank everyone for informing me that it is indeed so - there is a clock
]which ticks over every 55ms, which is approximately 18.17 times per second.
]
]If this is so, then would it be better to #define CLK_TCK to be (1000/55)?
]to provide greater accuracy?
]
]Ray

If you really want to get picky, it should be

     65536/3600

which comes out to be 18.20(4) ticks/second or every 54.931(640) ms
(where parenthesized digits repeat).  Given this figure, you should be
able to figure out the significance of the clock ticks occurring
18.2 (approx) times a second.

[On a tangent here -- don't you find it funny that the repeated digit
 sequence (640) appears ? -- hmm... a subliminal message I think :-) ]

                //-n-\\			 Naoto Kimura
        _____---=======---_____		 (abcscnuk@csuna.csun.edu)
    ====____\   /.. ..\   /____====
  //         ---\__O__/---         \\	Enterprise... Surrender or we'll
  \_\                             /_/	send back your *&^$% tribbles !!