On Sat, Feb 26, 2000 at 11:49:49PM +0100, Ingolf Koch wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 10:43:31PM +0100, Ingolf Koch wrote:
> > To be more precise: 20 cps with /dev/par0.
> 
> It turns out that the 20 cps were caused by some printf()s
> I had inserted (two per transmitted character). Sorry for
> the noise.
> 
> Without the printf()s, it's faster but still only about
> 500 cps.
> 
> The code however seems to be unnecessary complicated:
> why not use the timo parameter of the tsleep(9) instead
> of installing a seperate timeout(9)?
> 
> See the attached patch file. This does not speed things
> up significantly but improves readability a bit.

If you attach the file, and it works, yes, why not?
	-is