LB Booster
Programming >> Compatibility with LB4 >> timer 0, [label] http://lbb.conforums.com/index.cgi?board=compatibility&action=display&num=1361169806 timer 0, [label]
Post by tsh73 on Feb 18th, 2013, 05:43am
Reports smallest possible timer delay (16 ms for my XP) In LBB (1.80, sorry if not latest) errors with "duplicate label". That's at least misleading error message.
Actually, meaning will not change if code Code:
timer 1, [label]
- and it will work in LBB as well as in JB.
Re: timer 0, [label]
Post by tsh73 on Feb 18th, 2013, 05:50am
(I see current version is 1.86. Obviously I did not upgraded because 1.80 worked fine for me so far. I cannot download it while at work, I will try to do it at home and check on current version)
Re: timer 0, [label]
Post by tsh73 on Feb 18th, 2013, 4:01pm
Confirmed: works the same in LBB 1.86
Re: timer 0, [label]
Post by Richard Russell on Feb 19th, 2013, 08:28am
t0=time$("ms")
timer 0, [label] 'like, minimal possible timer delay?
My understanding is that the syntax TIMER 0 means 'deactivate the timer', in which case adding a label afterwards doesn't make sense. As far as LBB is concerned it sees the label as the start of the next statement, hence the 'duplicate label' error message.
If you want to get the smallest-possible delay why would you not use TIMER 1, [label]? Windows timers cannot have a smaller resolution than 1 millisecond.
Richard.
Re: timer 0, [label]
Post by tsh73 on Feb 20th, 2013, 04:28am
Hello Richard Well, I might as well use "timer 1, [label]" (and probably would in the future) - it just worked with 0 in JB/LB no problem. As for Quote:
My understanding is that the syntax TIMER 0 means 'deactivate the timer', in which case adding a label afterwards doesn't make sense.
LB Help says Quote:
The TIMER is deactivated by setting a time value of 0, and no branch label.