Subject: Re: DELAY vs. delay
To: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Perry E. Metzger <email@example.com>
Date: 03/25/1999 13:41:18
Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
> > > DELAY tends to be a macro, while delay tends to be a function call.
> > Yes, I see, but given the nature of that call (take some time), does it make
> > sense to have an inline version at all?
> Yes. vaxen. subroutine calls are hideously slow, and can take up to 100
> cycles, according to Jason. :-)
The i386 may (depending on conversations) be getting an inline DELAY()
that only calls delay() for large values. (I'm going to have to chat
with some people about this.)
> > Is it a matter of how much microseconds we are dalaying? I.E. should
> > "DELAY(10)" be used, but "delay(1000)"?
> Take care,