Most Efficient Timer?

[Dar Scott]

On Nov 29, 2004, at 12:36 PM, Scott Rossi wrote:

>> It looks to me that using "send in time" is efficient.
>
> Actually, I was referring to "efficiency" in terms of placing demands 
> on the
> system, not in the amount of time to process within Rev.

Oh, I see what you mean.  I used Activity Monitor on OS X and got this:

Send cycle (.1 s period):    16%
Default Button:              29%
Both:                        35%

Send cycle (.05 s period)    35% (fluctuates a lot)
Send cycle (.01 s period)   101%
Send cycle (1 s period)       2%

I'm on OS X 10.3.6 using a dual 1.25 GHz G4.

Dar
****************************************
     Dar Scott Consulting
     http://www.swcp.com/dsc/
     Programming Services
****************************************