 | | IndyLUG's Castle layout @ C&P Expo
|
| On the weekend of February 25 & 26, IndyLUG displayed at the Child and Parent Expo at the Indiana State Fairgrounds in Indianapolis. Half of the layout was Castle/medieval themed. Thanks to Matt Bieda, Jeramy Spurgeon, David Gregory, John Kyle, Alex (...) (20 years ago, 4-Mar-06, to lugnet.org.us.indylug, lugnet.castle, lugnet.pirates, FTX)
| | | | | Re: 3T
|
| In lugnet.org.us.laflrc, Steve Hassenplug wrote: <snip> (...) Ok, that makes some sense, thank you very much. I hate the thought of nesting that many more if statements, but that does appear to be the best way to solve the problem. Thanks John (20 years ago, 3-Mar-06, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: 3T
|
| (...) Actually, John, I think I may be able to explain the problem. You have two tasks running at the same time. For the most part, the processor will switch between the main task, and the scan tast. So, the order of execution would be something (...) (20 years ago, 3-Mar-06, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: 3T
|
| In lugnet.org.us.laflrc, Brian Davis wrote: <snip> (...) I don't know if I'm using the most efficient method either, but from what I have found... Tasks are run in parallel. If I start a task (the scan task) my main code will continue to run at the (...) (20 years ago, 3-Mar-06, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: 3T
|
| I'm not sure about the RCX, but with some languages, things like events, or other tasks, will not start executing until the current task gives up the processor. (like in a wait) Here's a suggestion that should avoid the delay... (...) ... (...) * If (...) (20 years ago, 3-Mar-06, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
|
