The Dink Network

Reply to Re: Me comment

If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
Username:
Password:
Subject:
Antispam: Enter Dink Smallwood's last name (surname) below.
Formatting: :) :( ;( :P ;) :D >( : :s :O evil cat blood
Bold font Italic font hyperlink Code tags
Message:
 
 
September 4th 2002, 11:22 AM
spike.gif
: 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.

Ya, wait(1); is easily noticeable.. but it doesn't screw the world if there's a knight following Dink, and when Dink walks to the next screen the knight isn't there right away.. It's only a beauty problem, really.

I don't understand.. 'Dink can't run several scripts at same time', do you mean two loops or two scripts overally? Two scripts work, I've never needed two loops at same time.

BTW, how is it possible to create a no-wait loop, that doesn't only re-run when the screen is changed, story changes etc. I found loop without wait(); only to tilt my computer..