Re: [Deinterlace-discuss] Problems fixed

[Nick K. <ni...@ne...>]

Rob Muller wrote:

> At 17:21 15-06-05, Rob Muller wrote:
>
>> Maybe we should directly use the rdtsc instruction? If so, would it 
>> be safe to assume that this instruction does exist on the hardware 
>> and returns valid results? I guess so since we never check if 
>> QueryPerformanceCounter() returns a valid result.
>
>
> Anyone?
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
> speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Deinterlace-discuss mailing list
> Dei...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/deinterlace-discuss
>
You should use the high resolution timer functions instead of inline 
assembly for timing. If the Query functions don't fail then it's safe to 
use them, and they've been working on machines as old as a Pentium 
running Windows 95.