From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <27d6433e4583e738c64aa984e499483d@quanstro.net>
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:16:25 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
In-Reply-To: <9f6b6afb208715c0f2db6433d94f8b21@terzarima.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] Raw Input Driver
Topicbox-Message-UUID: c086a658-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> >it's people realtime not real realtime.
>
> the former is an example of the latter.
> real-time is meeting deadlines. deadlines are always real, if you've got them.
> there isn't a distinction based on speed (ie, 1 usec is "real", but 10ms is not).
> any hard/soft distinction is typically based on whether the program can miss a deadline,
> and the consequences.

my point was that the consequences for occassional misses are just
a reduced perception of responsiveness.  for most applications, this
should be okay.  i would think it would be an undue burden to break
out the realtime tools for any program that has a ui.

(not related to my point, what about a time frame of 1 minute?
one day?)

- erik