Cohadar
master of fugue
- Reaction score
- 209
Ffs people check the version numbers of systems you use.
Not to mention that that small performance benefit in special cases would cause a performance loss in every other situation.After thinking this thoroughly I concluded that small performance benefit in some special cases is not worth of bloathing the system interface.
TT stays the way it is.
Why are people telling Cohadar to make Timer Ticker do exactly what Key Timers 2 does?
Well said.I guess for the same reason you are not limiting the KT2 functionality to lower periods.
Some people always try to use hammer on a screw.
(or to screw down a nail...)
But hey, if it's just for personal use, why not write your own. XD
meditating myself into the state of death
private function HF_Handler takes nothing returns nothing
local integer i = HF_Counter
loop
exitwhen i<=0
set Data = HF_Dataz<i>
if TriggerEvaluate(HF_Triggz<i>) then
set HF_Triggz<i> = HF_Triggz[HF_Counter]
set HF_Dataz<i> = HF_Dataz[HF_Counter]
set HF_Counter = HF_Counter - 1
endif
set i = i - 1
endloop
endfunction</i></i></i></i>
That is rather silly because the performance benefit is 0.5%
ClearConditions is almost as fast as I2H.
PS: you could hire Jesus4Lyf to do you a benchmark
Most people don't realize that timer system overhead is almost non-existent when compared with stuff that they put in their timer spells.
By the way, if you really want to get rid of that swap, use linked lists like KT2. But I will call you a silly head.
YEW SILLY HEAD!