Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- From: erewhon@xxxxxxxxxx (J French)
- Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:46:07 +0000 (UTC)
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:44:40 -0700, "Sam Hobbs"
<samuel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>"Karl E. Peterson" <karl@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:%23bWPHIRqFHA.3720@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Have you not considered that before recommending it?
>I assume then that you don't have an answer to the question of why
>QueryPerformanceCounter is inappropriate.
Well, simplistically, GetTickCount is the time you have been alive
QueryPerformanceCounter is your rate of heart beat
Apples and Oranges
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- From: Sam Hobbs
- Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- References:
- gettickcount returns a negative number???
- From: pithhelmet
- Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- From: Sam Hobbs
- Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- From: Karl E. Peterson
- Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- From: Sam Hobbs
- Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- From: Karl E. Peterson
- Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- From: Sam Hobbs
- gettickcount returns a negative number???
- Prev by Date: Re: What is the fastest way to determine if folder has subfolders or not!?
- Next by Date: Re: Seeking info on wParam and lParam
- Previous by thread: Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- Next by thread: Re: gettickcount returns a negative number???
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
