Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!rbj
From: rbj@uunet.UU.NET (Root Boy Jim)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: usleep by poll()
Message-ID: <127422@uunet.UU.NET>
Date: 3 Apr 91 20:30:42 GMT
References: <6925@auspex.auspex.com> <999@muffin.cme.nist.gov> <11691@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
Organization: UUNET Communications Services, Falls Church, VA
Lines: 21

In article <11691@dog.ee.lbl.gov> torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek) writes:
?In article <999@muffin.cme.nist.gov> libes@cme.nist.gov (Don Libes)
?[posts real code.  Commendable.  Now for a tangent :-) ]

No for a cotangent :-)

?Time values, including delays, should be in nanosecond granularity,
?if not finer.  (Nanoseconds has the advantage of fitting easily in 64
?bits as divided into `struct timevalue { long tv_sec; long tv_nsec; };'.)

By giving up a few bits for resolution, one can extend the range of
time values represented. A standard I have seen DEC use (first in
VMS/RSX RMS code) uses "hundreds of nanoseconds since [sometime in 1858]",
the date of the first photographic exposure by the Smithsonian.
I think this may actually a real ANSI time specification.

?In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Lawrence Berkeley Lab CSE/EE (+1 415 486 5427)
?Berkeley, CA		Domain:	torek@ee.lbl.gov
-- 
		[rbj@uunet 1] stty sane
		unknown mode: sane