01-06-2011 09:47 AM
@JRab, certainly if you're not showing seconds, then absolutely there's no reason to have a sub-second update period. My example was for if you are displaying seconds, in which case a 1.0s timer is the wrong thing to use.
The ideas behind my point extend to any periodic update situation, however, but with appropriate changes in the values. So, if you are showing minutes, then updating the time once per minute is not going to produce a stable display.
Neither will updating, say, every 45 seconds or even every 30s. For a "minutes" display, updating every second is certainly not too slow, though it's somewhat like updating sixty times per second (every 16.66ms) with a "seconds" display -- faster than really needed.
01-06-2011 09:54 AM
@peter: i agree that if you weigh the situation in that manner (60 times per minute and 60 times a second) then you are using a lot of resources for a slight change proportionately. however if you look at the bigger picture 60 times a minute is a whole lot better than doing 3600 times a minute. you just have to find the trade off and a good middle ground for what you are doing.
01-06-2011 03:20 PM
no worries bring on the questions!
the trace("tick") is just something i wrote in when i started writing the code for the app and forgot to take out. everytime it sets the label's text it the app sends a "tick" string back to the debugger. it has no effect on the program itself. hope that clears things up!