How to Generate an Accurate Timer Tick
in [VB.NET]
|
From: Cor Ligthert[MVP] on 21 May 2010 02:11 Then why not use the standard Windows.Forms.Form.Timer, somehow persons want to use the system.timer.timer (the windows service one) or the threading timer (who is able to be used in async) I am glad that you are not writing of the current fourth one the dispatcher timer. People always write about all timers beside the windows.forms.form.timer that the others are better, but never tell why those are better. The windows.forms.form timer is at least the most reliable one in most situations Cor "Charles" <blank(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message news:#S6R67E#KHA.1652(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Hi Dave > > Yes, I have. It was my understanding that the Timers timer was just a > wrapper for the Threading timer. Perhaps not. There doesn't seem to be > anything there that suggests it is any more reliable the the threading > version. If it doesn't use WM_TIMER messages, do you know how it does > work? > > Thanks > > Charles > > > "Davej" <galt_57(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:a38d2fce-5230-42bd-833c-e9b6748bf691(a)h37g2000pra.googlegroups.com... >> On May 20, 8:51 am, "Charles" <bl...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>> [...] Most of the time, each subsequent tick occurs at >>> exactly 10 seconds after the previous one, but occasionally >>> there can be as much as 20 or 30 seconds between ticks. >>> >> >> You've looked here? >> >> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.timers.timer.aspx >>
From: Charles on 21 May 2010 04:45 Hi Cor, good to hear from you. I have read that the Forms timer is actually less reliable in terms of its interval than the other timers, because it is single-threaded. Coupled with the fact that I want to use this in a service eventually, I don't think I can use the Forms timer. Cheers Charles "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <Notmyfirstname(a)planet.nl> wrote in message news:#3x7yxK#KHA.4308(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Then why not use the standard Windows.Forms.Form.Timer, somehow persons > want to use the system.timer.timer (the windows service one) or the > threading timer (who is able to be used in async) > > I am glad that you are not writing of the current fourth one the > dispatcher timer. > > People always write about all timers beside the windows.forms.form.timer > that the others are better, but never tell why those are better. > > The windows.forms.form timer is at least the most reliable one in most > situations > > Cor > > "Charles" <blank(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:#S6R67E#KHA.1652(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> Hi Dave >> >> Yes, I have. It was my understanding that the Timers timer was just a >> wrapper for the Threading timer. Perhaps not. There doesn't seem to be >> anything there that suggests it is any more reliable the the threading >> version. If it doesn't use WM_TIMER messages, do you know how it does >> work? >> >> Thanks >> >> Charles >> >> >> "Davej" <galt_57(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:a38d2fce-5230-42bd-833c-e9b6748bf691(a)h37g2000pra.googlegroups.com... >>> On May 20, 8:51 am, "Charles" <bl...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>>> [...] Most of the time, each subsequent tick occurs at >>>> exactly 10 seconds after the previous one, but occasionally >>>> there can be as much as 20 or 30 seconds between ticks. >>>> >>> >>> You've looked here? >>> >>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.timers.timer.aspx >>>
From: Cor Ligthert[MVP] on 21 May 2010 06:08 There is also written that American cars are better than German cars. Do you believe everything which is written without anything which explains why? Take a look at this page which compares timers. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc164015.aspx You can handle them top down like in this page as long as something where they don't work fail. Cor "Charles" <blank(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message news:e7o3vHM#KHA.5916(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Hi Cor, good to hear from you. > > I have read that the Forms timer is actually less reliable in terms of its > interval than the other timers, because it is single-threaded. Coupled > with the fact that I want to use this in a service eventually, I don't > think I can use the Forms timer. > > Cheers > > Charles > > > "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <Notmyfirstname(a)planet.nl> wrote in message > news:#3x7yxK#KHA.4308(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> Then why not use the standard Windows.Forms.Form.Timer, somehow persons >> want to use the system.timer.timer (the windows service one) or the >> threading timer (who is able to be used in async) >> >> I am glad that you are not writing of the current fourth one the >> dispatcher timer. >> >> People always write about all timers beside the windows.forms.form.timer >> that the others are better, but never tell why those are better. >> >> The windows.forms.form timer is at least the most reliable one in most >> situations >> >> Cor >> >> "Charles" <blank(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >> news:#S6R67E#KHA.1652(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> Hi Dave >>> >>> Yes, I have. It was my understanding that the Timers timer was just a >>> wrapper for the Threading timer. Perhaps not. There doesn't seem to be >>> anything there that suggests it is any more reliable the the threading >>> version. If it doesn't use WM_TIMER messages, do you know how it does >>> work? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> >>> "Davej" <galt_57(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:a38d2fce-5230-42bd-833c-e9b6748bf691(a)h37g2000pra.googlegroups.com... >>>> On May 20, 8:51 am, "Charles" <bl...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>> [...] Most of the time, each subsequent tick occurs at >>>>> exactly 10 seconds after the previous one, but occasionally >>>>> there can be as much as 20 or 30 seconds between ticks. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You've looked here? >>>> >>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.timers.timer.aspx >>>>
From: Jeff Gaines on 21 May 2010 07:28 On 21/05/2010 in message <OoAId2M#KHA.4768(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> Cor Ligthert[MVP] wrote: >There is also written that American cars are better than German cars. But only by Americans I would think! -- Jeff Gaines Dorset UK All things being equal, fat people use more soap
From: Charles on 21 May 2010 07:31
Have you actually read the article, Cor? I have. It bears out exactly what I said: "System.Windows.Forms.Timer If you're looking for a metronome, you've come to the wrong place." Charles "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <Notmyfirstname(a)planet.nl> wrote in message news:OoAId2M#KHA.4768(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > There is also written that American cars are better than German cars. > > Do you believe everything which is written without anything which explains > why? > > Take a look at this page which compares timers. > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc164015.aspx > > You can handle them top down like in this page as long as something where > they don't work fail. > > Cor > > > > "Charles" <blank(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:e7o3vHM#KHA.5916(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> Hi Cor, good to hear from you. >> >> I have read that the Forms timer is actually less reliable in terms of >> its interval than the other timers, because it is single-threaded. >> Coupled with the fact that I want to use this in a service eventually, I >> don't think I can use the Forms timer. >> >> Cheers >> >> Charles >> >> >> "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <Notmyfirstname(a)planet.nl> wrote in message >> news:#3x7yxK#KHA.4308(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>> Then why not use the standard Windows.Forms.Form.Timer, somehow persons >>> want to use the system.timer.timer (the windows service one) or the >>> threading timer (who is able to be used in async) >>> >>> I am glad that you are not writing of the current fourth one the >>> dispatcher timer. >>> >>> People always write about all timers beside the windows.forms.form.timer >>> that the others are better, but never tell why those are better. >>> >>> The windows.forms.form timer is at least the most reliable one in most >>> situations >>> >>> Cor >>> >>> "Charles" <blank(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >>> news:#S6R67E#KHA.1652(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>> Hi Dave >>>> >>>> Yes, I have. It was my understanding that the Timers timer was just a >>>> wrapper for the Threading timer. Perhaps not. There doesn't seem to be >>>> anything there that suggests it is any more reliable the the threading >>>> version. If it doesn't use WM_TIMER messages, do you know how it does >>>> work? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> Charles >>>> >>>> >>>> "Davej" <galt_57(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:a38d2fce-5230-42bd-833c-e9b6748bf691(a)h37g2000pra.googlegroups.com... >>>>> On May 20, 8:51 am, "Charles" <bl...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>> [...] Most of the time, each subsequent tick occurs at >>>>>> exactly 10 seconds after the previous one, but occasionally >>>>>> there can be as much as 20 or 30 seconds between ticks. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You've looked here? >>>>> >>>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.timers.timer.aspx >>>>> |