Almost as good as Alka-Seltzer!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTT1TSdWjkQ )
Phil
On 2/17/14, 9:07 PM, Geoff Canyon wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Phil Davis wrote:
Not sure, but it might make a difference if you update the cursor only
every 10th or 20th time through the loop. Like
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Phil Davis wrote:
> Not sure, but it might make a difference if you update the cursor only
> every 10th or 20th time through the loop. Like so:
>
I read through the first responses in this thread and with each one, in my
head I was saying louder and louder, "don'
Alex, thanks for jumping in here. I'll try that, but in the meantime I
must say that of all the posts I've ever made this is one of the most
gratifying. I just tried Phil's suggestion of increasing the X-mod to
100 and, just as Phil predicted, I was shocked at the results. Don't
know why I di
Or make it time-based rather than number-of-times-through-a-loop
put the millisecs into t1
repeat
if the millisecs-t1 > somenumberofmillisecs then
set the cursor to busy
put the millisecs into t1
end if
. do something useful
end repeat
-- Alex.
On 18/02
You may have done this already, but experiment with other cursor update
intervals - like every 50th or 100th time. You may be shocked!
Phil
On 2/17/14, 4:21 PM, Ray wrote:
Ah Haa!! You've shaved another 3 and a half seconds off what started
out as 40 seconds, got cut down to 5, and is now jus
Ah Haa!! You've shaved another 3 and a half seconds off what started out
as 40 seconds, got cut down to 5, and is now just 1.5 seconds. Very good!
Phil - many thanks for your help on this. I'll probably use these ideas
on many handlers to come.
Ray
On 2/17/2014 7:06 PM, Phil Davis wrote:
p
Ray,
Not sure, but it might make a difference if you update the cursor only
every 10th or 20th time through the loop. Like so:
put 0 into x
repeat
add 1 to x
if x mod 10 = 0 then set cursor to busy
end repeat
Best -
Phil Davis
On 2/17/14, 2:15 PM, Ray wrote:
OK - that trim
OK - that trimmed about 35 seconds off a 40 second loop with the image I
was using. Many thanks! I think the deleting of characters was slowing
it down.
On 2/17/2014 4:41 PM, Paul Dupuis wrote:
No ideas on speeding it up. The only thought looking at the code is you
may want to replace 'char'
Paul,
Many thanks for your help here. I'll experiment with this tonight and
let you know how it goes.
Ray
On 2/17/2014 4:41 PM, Paul Dupuis wrote:
No ideas on speeding it up. The only thought looking at the code is you
may want to replace 'char' with 'byte' ( and numToChar with numToByte)
s
No ideas on speeding it up. The only thought looking at the code is you
may want to replace 'char' with 'byte' ( and numToChar with numToByte)
since you are really dealing with bytes rather than characters and in
future LiveCode versions, char may not always correspond to a single byte.
I might su
On 17/02/2014 20:16, Ray wrote:
That works great! And a little experimenting shows that waiting 0
milliseconds accomplishes the same goal without significantly slowing
down an already slow handler. Not to sound greedy but you wouldn't
also have any idea how to speed up this loop would you?
That works great! And a little experimenting shows that waiting 0
milliseconds accomplishes the same goal without significantly slowing
down an already slow handler. Not to sound greedy but you wouldn't also
have any idea how to speed up this loop would you?
Thanks,
Ray
On 2/17/2014 2:57 P
Ray,
Is this behavior (title bar saying "not responding", etc.) happening
under Windows 8 perchance?
If so, we've seen the same or similar behavior under Windows 8 in long
repeat loops. We've found that including a "wait for 1 millisecond with
messages" line in the loop and this mostly lets Windo
13 matches
Mail list logo
