 |
Author |
Topic: delay better than framerate() (Read 518 times) |
|
Andre_Michelle
|
delay better than framerate()
« on: Jul 30th, 2004, 1:35pm » |
|
I found this solution to avoid the bucking when using framerate();
Code:
int ms;
int defMsPerFrame = 25;
void loop()
{
ms = millis();
{all the drawing, computing code here}
int frameTime = ( millis() - ms );
int rest = defMsPerFrame - frameTime;
if ( rest > 0 )
{
//-- DELAY UNTILL ELAPSE
delay( rest );
}
else
{
//println( "computer too slow: " + rest + " millisecond for this frame: " + frameTime );
}
}
|
|
It runs very smooth now in my project.
Maybe it helps anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
fjen
|
Re: delay better than framerate()
« Reply #1 on: Jul 31st, 2004, 10:20am » |
|
i'm not sure how delay is implemented in java, but if it's a timer or an object.wait thing (looks like) than the delay might not be exact .. just a thought. not sure if it matters in this case anyway ..
from the java doc:
This class (Timer) does not offer real-time guarantees: it schedules tasks using the Object.wait(long) method.
&&
from Object.wait(long): (will be awakened if: ) The specified amount of real time has elapsed, more or less.
|
| « Last Edit: Jul 31st, 2004, 10:21am by fjen » |
|
|
|
|
KQ
|
Re: delay better than framerate()
« Reply #2 on: Aug 18th, 2004, 4:36pm » |
|
thanks very much. solved my problems 
|
|
|
|
|
fry
|
Re: delay better than framerate()
« Reply #3 on: Sep 2nd, 2004, 8:21pm » |
|
that's awfully odd.. since framerate() just calls delay() internally..
|
|
|
|
|
|
