[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [MiNT] DATE/TIME cookies

> From: owner-mint@fishpool.com [mailto:owner-mint@fishpool.com]On Behalf
> Of Petr Stehlik
> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 1999 10:26 AM
> To: Konrad Kokoszkiewicz
> Cc: mint
> Subject: Re: [MiNT] DATE/TIME cookies
> > The point is, that even if the code exists, it can be executed only
> > if someone calls Tgettime() (for example), and not _constantly_. Once
> > per second? There is no interrupt in MiNT that occurs once per second,
> Guido already answered that. No new code, no overhead.
> > Petr, please explain why do you insist to it in such a weird way
> DATE/TIME cookies: introduced by DTCOOKIE.PRG several years ago, supported
> also by BigDOS (probably because DTCOOKIE would not work with BigDOS?).
> Current version of MiNT allows DTCOOKIE to install the cookies. Future
> kernels will change the internal code so DTCOOKIE will not work. This is
> the main reason why I would like to get the two cookies created by MiNT
> itself.
> And why do I use DATE/TIME cookies instead of hooking on traps? It's
> simply easier to write, faster to execute (called once per second, not
> 200x as you thought for unknown reason), requires less code and does not
> prolong XBRA chains/does not require TraPatch. And please keep on mind - I
> didn't invent the cookies and I am not alone using them.

Could you please explain why your code can't run as a) a desk accessory or
b) a MiNT background process?

How do you actually access the screen from the interrupt???

Regards, jr