Evert Glebbeek wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 February 2005 13:44, Tobias Scheuer wrote:
>>as already discussed in the forum, I would propose to change the current
>>implementation of tim_win32_rest in wtimer.c to the following:
> To summarize the discussion in the thread and the final conclusion, the end
> result was that we decided not to do this because results are too
> unpredictable across different machines and versions of Windows, right?
it benefits fast machines, it retards slower machines.
so overall, best not to touch it, until the slower machines are more