Re: 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- From: fpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Frank Miles)
- Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 17:48:11 +0000 (UTC)
In article <Xns989E18B5E84E2Noemailadr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Mike Monett <No@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]
DOS also gives the fastest possible performance, since you own the
cpu and don't have to give up cpu cycles for multitasking. That's
the reason I mentioned it - the response while sifting through a
megabyte of data was practically instantaneous from the keyboard,
but it would be a bit slower in Windows.
[snip]
Don't you have gaps where the various interrupts take control away?
Perhaps your application doesn't have this problem, but if the gaps
occur at "critical times" - say, in the middle of a single-shot
acquisition - this would seem to be a problem. Do you turn off
interrupts, and if so for how long? Are there any significant
penalties for turning them off for an "extended period"?
-f
--
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- From: Mike Monett
- Re: 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- From: Joel Kolstad
- Re: 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- References:
- 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- From: Chris Carlen
- Re: 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- From: Mike Monett
- Re: 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- From: Joel Kolstad
- Re: 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- From: Mike Monett
- 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- Prev by Date: Re: Google patent search online (beta)
- Next by Date: Re: building electronics beacon for survival
- Previous by thread: Re: 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- Next by thread: Re: 12 and 16-bit oscilloscopes
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|