Making my own Sleep() function

[Nazwa]

Hello

How can I make my own Sleep function, without using while() and comparing time passed?
I tried to find something useful on google, but I wasn't able to find anything useful.

----
Nazwa

[Girish Kanakagiri]

Hello

How can I make my own Sleep function, without using while() and comparing time passed?
I tried to find something useful on google, but I wasn't able to find anything useful.

----
Nazwa

Just Call a delay function with a parameter.
make the function recursive by decrementing the parameter.
Give exit status as parameter value as Zero to come out.
For Ex:

void delay(20); // function call

//Delay Function
void delay(int i)
{
 if (i == 0)
 return;
 delay(i-10);  // give the decrement as 1 or 10 or 100 as convenient
}

[weaknessforcats]

Please don't do this:

//Delay Function
void delay(int i)
{
if (i == 0)
return;
delay(i-10); // give the decrement as 1 or 10 or 100 as convenient
}

The delay() function recursively calls itself. This will lead to a crash when the stack memory is exhausted.

With a 3.8GHZ processor, you will need a very big loop indeed to delay even a small amount.

What is wrong with using the OS sleep function in the first place??

[tnga]

Just Call a delay function with a parameter.
make the function recursive by decrementing the parameter.
Give exit status as parameter value as Zero to come out.
For Ex:

void delay(20); // function call

//Delay Function
void delay(int i)
{
 if (i == 0)
 return;
 delay(i-10);  // give the decrement as 1 or 10 or 100 as convenient
}

LOL, that's cool!!!!

[seforo]

Why do you want to reinvent the wheel. Sleep is already there. You can simply do this
[CODE=c]
#include <unistd.h>
int main()
{
sleep(4);
return 0;
}
[/CODE]

[Nazwa]

Problem with sleep is that It takes seconds as parameter, and I need miliseconds. I can always make my own function by creating while loop which runs for requested time, but it uses full CPU. I tried with unistd.h but it's not working under BCB and C::B.
Do you have any other idea how to do it? I've seen something like that made in short asm code long, long time ago, but can't find it again.

[Girish Kanakagiri]

Problem with sleep is that It takes seconds as parameter, and I need miliseconds. I can always make my own function by creating while loop which runs for requested time, but it uses full CPU. I tried with unistd.h but it's not working under BCB and C::B.
Do you have any other idea how to do it? I've seen something like that made in short asm code long, long time ago, but can't find it again.

//function call
mysleep(50);

//function
void mysleep(int i)
{
  for(int n=1;n<i;n++);
}

I think this is what you are looking for.

[JonLT]

[code=cpp]
#include <ctime>

void mySleep(int sleepTime)
{
int curTime = clock(); //get the current time
while(clock() - curTime < sleepTime){} //wait until the time has passed
}
[/code]

the function takes milliseconds as argument. It works by first getting the current time, and the subtracting that from the real current time, and when the result of that is bigger than the passed value, the time has passed.

[Nazwa]

[code=cpp]
#include <ctime>

void mySleep(int sleepTime)
{
int curTime = clock(); //get the current time
while(clock() - curTime < sleepTime){} //wait until the time has passed
}
[/code]

the function takes milliseconds as argument. It works by first getting the current time, and the subtracting that from the real current time, and when the result of that is bigger than the passed value, the time has passed.

It works, but it uses 100% CPU, and point is to make it to use much less.
After all, I think there is nothing more to deal with.

Thanks for help.

[RRick]

You're back to using a system call for your timeouts.

On Unix there's something called nanosleep. It gets around the "seconds" limitation of the sleep command. There's also "gettimeofd ay" which returns time with sub-second accuracy.

I'm not sure what Windows uses, but I'm pretty sure it has one, too.

[Banfa]

You're back to using a system call for your timeouts.

On Unix there's something called nanosleep. It gets around the "seconds" limitation of the sleep command. There's also "gettimeofd ay" which returns time with sub-second accuracy.

I'm not sure what Windows uses, but I'm pretty sure it has one, too.

The Sleep function in Windows already takes milliseconds as it's parameter unit

[Akai]

It works, but it uses 100% CPU, and point is to make it to use much less.
After all, I think there is nothing more to deal with.

Thanks for help.

Hello!

I had the same problem using a function like that, but I think that I found a solution:

#include <time.h>

void staticSleep(int frequency)
{
    clock_t goal = ( frequency * 1000 ) + clock();
    while (goal > clock())
      Sleep( 1 );
}

Where "frequency" is the time in seconds that you want to wait.

I hope that it is what you looking for.