and subtract 86400 instead of 86399
Regards,
Michael
Statistics: Posted by Michael Calkins — Sun Sep 18, 2005 11:48 pm
]]>
Code:
'PQBC - Inkey$ Wait '--------- do a=a+1 red& = timer + (how ever long suits your program as a delay) WHILE RED& > TIMER OR key$ <> "" IF TIMER < 2 THENLET RED& = RED& - 86399END IFkey$=inkey$ WEND if a = 100000 then gosub finalselection loop while key$="" 
Statistics: Posted by Patz QuickBASIC Creations — Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:47 pm
]]>
Statistics: Posted by moneo — Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:22 pm
]]>
i don't want to speed it up, i want to replace a=a+1 with something that will work indepent of the speed of the cpu
Try this... Using the TIMER function will do this.Code:
'PQBC - Inkey$ Wait'---------do a=a+1 red& = timer + (how ever long suits your program as a delay)WHILE RED& > TIMER OR key$ <> ""key$=inkey$WENDif a = 100000 then gosub finalselectionloop while key$="" Statistics: Posted by Patz QuickBASIC Creations — Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:30 am
]]>
]]>
Michael
Statistics: Posted by Michael Calkins — Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:10 pm
]]>
*****
Statistics: Posted by moneo — Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:05 pm
]]>
* In order to count up to 100,000, the variable "a" must be either SINGLE or DOUBLE, by default or explicitly defined.
You are forgetting LONGs.Please puta isn't declared as a specfic varible i just typed
a=0
Code:
DIM a AS LONGAnyone can freely and legally download the QBASIC Interpreter (version 1.1) from:no i compile the program because other might not have qb
ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/Products/Window ... olddos.exe
Regards,
Michael
Statistics: Posted by Michael Calkins — Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:16 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
rights the correct code
a isn't declared as a specfic varible i just typed
a=0the a=0 isn't anywhere near is bit of code
1.4Ghz isn't my machine is a customer(ish)'s machine
i'm using
* Operating system - Windows 98SE
* Language version - QB7.1
* Running interpreted or compiled -- sorry i didn't understand this one
Fine, then assuming you have a label elsewhere in the program called "finalselection", this code should work.a isn't declared as a specfic varible i just typed
a=0
Code:
doa=a+1key$=inkey$if a = 100000 then goto finalselection elseloop while key$=""1.4Ghz isn't my machine is a customer(ish)'s machine
i'm using
* Operating system - Windows 98SE
* Language version - QB7.1
* Running interpreted or compiled -- sorry i didn't understand this one
Just a suggestion, the following line of code:
if a = 100000 then goto finalselection else
is valid and works, but in my opinion is poor programming practice. Remove the "else", it doesn't do anything and adds confusion.
When you work with QB, you have the option of running the program in interpretive mode (which is probably what you use), or you can request QB to compile the program and produce an executable file, a .exe file. You can give this .exe file to someone else and he can run your program without having to have QB.
*****
Statistics: Posted by moneo — Thu Sep 15, 2005 4:41 pm
]]>
a=0
Code:
doa=a+1key$=inkey$if a = 100000 then goto finalselection elseloop while key$=""1.4Ghz isn't my machine is a customer(ish)'s machine
i'm using
* Operating system - Windows 98SE
* Language version - QB7.1
* Running interpreted or compiled -- sorry i didn't understand this one
Statistics: Posted by RayBritton — Thu Sep 15, 2005 3:02 pm
]]>
* The variable "a" must be initialized to zero before entering the DO loop.
* The statement "if a = 100000" is incomplete and invalid.
* The way your code is written, assuming the invalid statement allows it to run, the program will sit and wait for a character before exiting the DO loop. Therefore, the speed of the human hitting the key will determine how long the DO loop runs.
When you fix the code, there are other factors which will influence the speed besides the clock speed of the machines:
* Operating system (Native DOS or Windows)
* Language version (GWBasic, Basica, QuickBasic, QBasic)
* Running interpreted or compiled
SUGGESTION: It's ok to use your old 133mhz machine for testing, but if your 1.4ghz machine is where you want the final program to run, then do performance testing on the new machine and forget about it on the old machine, whether it was better or worse.
*****
Statistics: Posted by moneo — Thu Sep 15, 2005 1:51 pm
]]>
]]>
There is a way around it but it takes the RealTime Clock... kinda hard to explain... and too much code anyway...
Wait for the other experts...
grtz
Seb
Statistics: Posted by Guest — Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:34 am
]]>