Reply to Re: Would it be possible?
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
: Ya, no wait loops own. But uh, for things like the wait(1); loop...just use wait(25); Because...you don't notice a quarter second..
: Like my mana system...every 1/4 second it checks your mana and screen, and updates if necisary.. so while its not hogging the cpu too much...you still don't notice the delay.. you could even go to 1/2 second maybe...
: But i suppose i should test my scripts on a slower computer sometime...but meh
Hmm, odd. It is always noticeable when I use low-wait loops that loop essentially 'forever'. Generally (for me), anything under 100 is noticeable. And I have a 1.4 GHZ.
And wait(25); is actually a fourtieth of a second, wait(250); is a quarter of a second.
And wait() isn't really wait at all. All wait() does is allow other scripts and processes to run, and presumably sleep during excess time left, as Dink doesn't truly multitask (it can keep several scripts in memory, but it can't run them at the same time). Which is why a no-wait infinite loop is so danging.
So if you have lots of other things going on, wait(1) is long, whereas nothing else is going on wait(1) should be shorter.
: Like my mana system...every 1/4 second it checks your mana and screen, and updates if necisary.. so while its not hogging the cpu too much...you still don't notice the delay.. you could even go to 1/2 second maybe...
: But i suppose i should test my scripts on a slower computer sometime...but meh
Hmm, odd. It is always noticeable when I use low-wait loops that loop essentially 'forever'. Generally (for me), anything under 100 is noticeable. And I have a 1.4 GHZ.
And wait(25); is actually a fourtieth of a second, wait(250); is a quarter of a second.
And wait() isn't really wait at all. All wait() does is allow other scripts and processes to run, and presumably sleep during excess time left, as Dink doesn't truly multitask (it can keep several scripts in memory, but it can't run them at the same time). Which is why a no-wait infinite loop is so danging.
So if you have lots of other things going on, wait(1) is long, whereas nothing else is going on wait(1) should be shorter.
