Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Rhinorhino on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Something like sleep function
- Thread starter arunjp
- Start date
Well, you could call the function at the end of the function that you want it to execute after -- that would probably serve the purpose...
and javascript has a function called setTimeout that works like this:
setTimeout(functionOrStatement, milliseconds)
so that if I wanted a function, doSomething(), to fire 3 seconds after the page finished loading, I would say this:
<body onLoad="setTimeout('doSomething();', 3000);">
Where the functionOrStatement part of the function is any valid javascript statement or function.
But, for this particular question, I'd probably stick to calling the function inside (and at the end, no less) of the function that you want to finish executing before you call the other...
hope it helps!
Paul Prewett
and javascript has a function called setTimeout that works like this:
setTimeout(functionOrStatement, milliseconds)
so that if I wanted a function, doSomething(), to fire 3 seconds after the page finished loading, I would say this:
<body onLoad="setTimeout('doSomething();', 3000);">
Where the functionOrStatement part of the function is any valid javascript statement or function.
But, for this particular question, I'd probably stick to calling the function inside (and at the end, no less) of the function that you want to finish executing before you call the other...
hope it helps!
Paul Prewett
luciddream
Programmer
//sleep function. stops execution for specified milliseconds.
function sleep(num)
{
var f = new Date();
f = new Number(f);
f = f + num;
while(true)
{
var n = new Date();
n = new Number
;
if(n >= f)
{
break;
}
}
} luciddream@subdimension.com
function sleep(num)
{
var f = new Date();
f = new Number(f);
f = f + num;
while(true)
{
var n = new Date();
n = new Number
;if(n >= f)
{
break;
}
}
} luciddream@subdimension.com
luciddream, what does the processor on the machine that runs this code look like while this function is "sleeping"?
Isn't it pegged out?
What is the advantage of using this code over using something like the setTimeout() function? Would the setTimeout not be friendlier on the processor?
I'm curious to know because whenever I try to make a function (or code) "sleep", I try not to use that while looping because it just cycles like mad -- eating up my resources.
thx
paul
Isn't it pegged out?
What is the advantage of using this code over using something like the setTimeout() function? Would the setTimeout not be friendlier on the processor?
I'm curious to know because whenever I try to make a function (or code) "sleep", I try not to use that while looping because it just cycles like mad -- eating up my resources.
thx
paul
luciddream
Programmer
well, the only advantage to using a sleep function is that if you want a pause in the middle of your code, you don't have to put the rest of your code in a separate function. also, setTimeout()'s don't wait for you to finish with modal components.... for example... try these two pieces of code...
for(var i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
setTimeout('alert()', 5000);
}
and:
for(var i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
alert()
sleep(5000);
}
the second one actaully waits five seconds between alerts, where the first pops them all up one after the other.
its not very practical or efficient, but, it does work. luciddream@subdimension.com
for(var i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
setTimeout('alert()', 5000);
}
and:
for(var i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
alert()
sleep(5000);
}
the second one actaully waits five seconds between alerts, where the first pops them all up one after the other.
its not very practical or efficient, but, it does work. luciddream@subdimension.com
- Thread starter
- #6
I agree with link9 that setTimeout seems preferable to a loop. Would the following work?
var count=5; // using the given example
var num=5000;
var test;
// Does it need "test"?
function sleep() {
if (count>0) {
alert();
count--;
test=setTimeout("sleep();",num);
}
else clearTimeout(test);
}
// or would this be sufficient?
function sleep() {
if (count>0) {
alert();
count--;
setTimeout("sleep();",num);
}
}
var count=5; // using the given example
var num=5000;
var test;
// Does it need "test"?
function sleep() {
if (count>0) {
alert();
count--;
test=setTimeout("sleep();",num);
}
else clearTimeout(test);
}
// or would this be sufficient?
function sleep() {
if (count>0) {
alert();
count--;
setTimeout("sleep();",num);
}
}
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question