WM_TIMER remaining/elapsed time...
in [MFC]
|
Prev: _in s and _out s ?
Next: MSI Serial Number Validation
From: Tom Serface on 30 Apr 2010 08:48 Hi Simon, Did you get an answer that works for you? I want to make sure your problem got solved. I wouldn't stress too much about the comments made. Written text in newsgroups and emails is easily misinterpreted. Believe me, everyone likes short, but to the point, questions since that makes it easy to answer. I think Joe saw your first without taking the time to read the second or the replies you'd gotten before he checked in. Sometimes newsgroups are hard to follow so ... Anyway... is it working for you now? Tom "Simon" <bad(a)example.com> wrote in message news:uMS4flE6KHA.5676(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > On 2010/04/30 08:26 AM, Joseph M. Newcomer wrote: >> You described something you thought you wanted, to solve an undefined >> problem. > > No, I asked 2 fairly straight forward questions, read my OP again. > is it possible to pause a timer and is there a way to know how many ms > remain. > >> ...state what problem you were trying to solve, so we could not offer >> suggestions about what >> might actually do the job, because we didn't know what you were trying to >> accomplish. > > No, _you_ could not offer suggestions. > Others did, and they very good suggestions, thanks. > >> >> Actually, my own take on this is that if you have to keep checking as you >> describe, you >> need to redesign the application so this is not even a problem that needs >> to be solved. >> You are tyring to retrofit something into an existing app that it was not >> designed to >> handle, and you are probably approaching the problem incorrectly. > > No, this is the wrong assumption. > > I could write a book about the application and _then_ ask my question(s). > > Or I could try to be as short and to the point as possible in order to get > some help/insight/tips. > > Even the one example I gave had to be short and to the point. > Any programmer would understand that. > > This is not an architecture design meeting room, this is a NG. > > Regards, > > Simon > >
From: Simon on 30 Apr 2010 09:15 On 2010/04/30 02:48 PM, Tom Serface wrote: > Hi Simon, > > Did you get an answer that works for you? I want to make sure your > problem got solved. > Hi, Thanks for the reply, in the end I just added a flag that does something like. // ----------------------------- OnTimer( ... ) { if( busy ) { timer_is_complete = true; } else { DoSomething(); } } .... DoingSomStuff() { // do the stuff if( true == timer_is_comlete ) { DoSomething(); } } // -------------------------------- But I am not 100% happy with it. I would prefer to pause the timer. That way, when you resume the timer the normal chain of events will happen. I could write my own timer class using a thread but this would add a lot over testing overhead to the current app. I will almost certainly create a branch with a bunch of tests before going live with it. Thanks again Simon
From: Tom Serface on 30 Apr 2010 10:10 You could simulate a pause by just keeping track of the timer tick downs (seconds) in your own variable and decrement it every time the timer is called. Then to pause, you would essentially stop the timer, but keep the variable (a member of your class). Then to start you would use the amount of time not ticked off (using the variable) to set the timer again. When the timer finishes you could you stop and start it again using the full amount of time again as part of the timer handler. You could also have a flag, like your busy flag, that just ignores the timer firing when it happens and returns immediately without doing anything. This would simulate doing a pause (at least in the functionality of it). Tom "Simon" <bad(a)example.com> wrote in message news:eUH0kcG6KHA.4508(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > On 2010/04/30 02:48 PM, Tom Serface wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> Did you get an answer that works for you? I want to make sure your >> problem got solved. >> > > Hi, > > Thanks for the reply, in the end I just added a flag that does something > like. > > // ----------------------------- > OnTimer( ... ) > { > if( busy ) > { > timer_is_complete = true; > } > else > { > DoSomething(); > } > } > > ... > > DoingSomStuff() > { > // do the stuff > > if( true == timer_is_comlete ) > { > DoSomething(); > } > } > > // -------------------------------- > > But I am not 100% happy with it. I would prefer to pause the timer. That > way, when you resume the timer the normal chain of events will happen. > > I could write my own timer class using a thread but this would add a lot > over testing overhead to the current app. > I will almost certainly create a branch with a bunch of tests before going > live with it. > > Thanks again > > Simon
From: Joseph M. Newcomer on 30 Apr 2010 10:11 See be;pw/// On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:41:53 +0200, Simon <bad(a)example.com> wrote: >On 2010/04/30 08:26 AM, Joseph M. Newcomer wrote: >> You described something you thought you wanted, to solve an undefined problem. > >No, I asked 2 fairly straight forward questions, read my OP again. >is it possible to pause a timer and is there a way to know how many ms >remain. **** ANd the answers were negative, which meant I couldn't really tell you what might work. > >> ...state what problem you were trying to solve, so we could not offer suggestions about what >> might actually do the job, because we didn't know what you were trying to accomplish. > >No, _you_ could not offer suggestions. >Others did, and they very good suggestions, thanks. **** They were better at guessing than I was. I get tired of trying to outguess what the question actually should have been, so I don't answer if I don't have specification of the problem. **** > >> >> Actually, my own take on this is that if you have to keep checking as you describe, you >> need to redesign the application so this is not even a problem that needs to be solved. >> You are tyring to retrofit something into an existing app that it was not designed to >> handle, and you are probably approaching the problem incorrectly. > >No, this is the wrong assumption. **** Then I am very suspect of the design. You have to deal with race conditions, which is what is going to happen if between the check and the timer event something cmes in. The last few instances of this kind of code I saw managed to delay the transaction request unduly because the code was of the form "if no request is present, restart the timer for the specified interval" and the request came in just after the test, so there was a long delay. In these cases, the delays were several hundred milliseconds, enough for the remoted embedded system to timeout and re-transmit its request. **** > >I could write a book about the application and _then_ ask my question(s). > >Or I could try to be as short and to the point as possible in order to >get some help/insight/tips. *** But when the answers are "it is not possible" then we are left to guess about how the problem might be solved, and not knowing what the problem is means the guesses might be incorrect. **** > >Even the one example I gave had to be short and to the point. >Any programmer would understand that. > >This is not an architecture design meeting room, this is a NG. **** And there's a difference? Architecture is all that there is; choose the wrong architecture, and you end up needing capabilities that do not exist or make mistakes about what capabilities exist and let them drive the architecture (e.g., the Olcott Saga), and you end up with complex solutions to simple problems. Most of the disasters I've fixed in the last decade were architecture design problems caused by either having to retrofit a new idea to an old app (and getting it completely wrong) or expecting some capability to exist in the OS, designing as if it was there, discovering it was not there, and building some amazingly clumsy solution to the problem. Each of those was GREAT for me because I could bill for WEEKS of my time while I rewrote the code to actually be viable, but it was expensive for the client to have to have the architecture reworked to accomodate the changes they actually wanted. Since I had to guess what the problem might be, I guessed wrong., but I don't like to guess at all. The correct question would have been "I need to know how much time has elapsed since I set a timer, because <problem description here>" and the answers are much easier to give. joe > >Regards, > >Simon > Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP] email: newcomer(a)flounder.com Web: http://www.flounder.com MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm
From: Joseph M. Newcomer on 30 Apr 2010 10:13
I download NG posts, answer them over a period of many hours, and then download some more. Sometimes, there have been several answers since the original post or the most recent download. THere are people who think I have an "instantaneous view" of all posts by the time I make mine, but my collection might be six hours old, and I can only answer based on what I see, not what might have happened in the interim. joe On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 07:48:03 -0500, "Tom Serface" <tom(a)camaswood.com> wrote: >Hi Simon, > >Did you get an answer that works for you? I want to make sure your problem >got solved. > >I wouldn't stress too much about the comments made. Written text in >newsgroups and emails is easily misinterpreted. Believe me, everyone likes >short, but to the point, questions since that makes it easy to answer. I >think Joe saw your first without taking the time to read the second or the >replies you'd gotten before he checked in. Sometimes newsgroups are hard to >follow so ... > >Anyway... is it working for you now? > >Tom > >"Simon" <bad(a)example.com> wrote in message >news:uMS4flE6KHA.5676(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> On 2010/04/30 08:26 AM, Joseph M. Newcomer wrote: >>> You described something you thought you wanted, to solve an undefined >>> problem. >> >> No, I asked 2 fairly straight forward questions, read my OP again. >> is it possible to pause a timer and is there a way to know how many ms >> remain. >> >>> ...state what problem you were trying to solve, so we could not offer >>> suggestions about what >>> might actually do the job, because we didn't know what you were trying to >>> accomplish. >> >> No, _you_ could not offer suggestions. >> Others did, and they very good suggestions, thanks. >> >>> >>> Actually, my own take on this is that if you have to keep checking as you >>> describe, you >>> need to redesign the application so this is not even a problem that needs >>> to be solved. >>> You are tyring to retrofit something into an existing app that it was not >>> designed to >>> handle, and you are probably approaching the problem incorrectly. >> >> No, this is the wrong assumption. >> >> I could write a book about the application and _then_ ask my question(s). >> >> Or I could try to be as short and to the point as possible in order to get >> some help/insight/tips. >> >> Even the one example I gave had to be short and to the point. >> Any programmer would understand that. >> >> This is not an architecture design meeting room, this is a NG. >> >> Regards, >> >> Simon >> >> Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP] email: newcomer(a)flounder.com Web: http://www.flounder.com MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm |