assuming your OS is Windows, perhaps you could use the IsNetworkAlive function https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/desktop/api/sensapi/nf-sensapi-isnetworkalive I am not a Windows API expert, so this is only an Idea that you may want to consider I ran winapifamily.h through FBfrog, and this is ...

hello dodicat
would you have a look at this pdf and let me know what you think? https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/43b1/b ... 82c447.pdf
it has source code in TurboBasic, so it should be relatively easy to port to FB if you think it's worth the trouble

you may be able to use PlaySound https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previo ... (v%3Dvs.85)#requirements
also have a look at this post, perhaps it will you some ideas viewtopic.php?p=220706#p220706

the post limit is 64000 characters, or is it bytes? not sure which, but my guess is that you would probably be able to post your code in one post.

thank you marpon :-)
I plan on testing it soon.

updated, first post

here's an unexpected result, my times are FBwin32 gas 15.7090276000269 seconds FBwin32 gcc 9.54091600001459 seconds FBwin64 gcc 48.57187550002709 seconds FBdarwin x64 gcc 8.71 seconds spectral-norm.bas /' The Computer Language Benchmarks Game ' ' spectral-norm C gcc #3 program ' https://benchmarksga...

here's the binary-tree benchmark, time differences between FB versions are small, my times were FBwin32 gas, 67.26 seconds FBwin32 gcc, 61.59 seconds FBwin64 gcc, 52.00 seconds binary-trees.bas /' The Computer Language Benchmarks Game * https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/ co...

jj2007 wrote: So the reason for the slowness of 32-bit code is just a dumb GCC version, nothing else.

I don't get your point, the 32-bit version compiled with -gen gcc is almost as fast as that of the 64-bit version, the -gen gas version is the one that is slow

@Coolman it is your choice which compiler version you want to use, in my experience, FBx64 executables are usually faster than FBx86, except for graphics I don't have a real world benchmark, so here's the nbody benchmark my times on Windows 10 x64 FBwin32, fbc -w all -asm intel -gen gas nbody.bas -0...

also, if compiling with FBx64 use optimization option, I prefer -O 2, or what's the same -Wc -O2
-O3 adds very little to the performance, sometimes it's even slower and it can cause problems.

@deltarho[1859]
I had never heard of HPET until now, interesting stuff https://www.ghacks.net/2013/04/18/try-c ... rformance/

thank you dodicat for looking into it
@deltarho[1859]
interesting information, thanks for sharing :-)

nothing in particular, just wondered which is more accurate, but my test suggest that timer uses QueryPerformanceCounter, so my guess is that timer and GetTickCount64 are the same as far as accuracy is concerned. #define _WIN32_WINNT &h0602 #include "windows.bi" dim as ulongint tc, qc1...

just curious to know whether one or the other is more precise and how would you test it? #define _WIN32_WINNT &h0602 #include "windows.bi" dim as ulongint tc dim as double t dim as double s tc = GetTickCount64() t=timer s = 0 for i as longint = 1 to 1000000'000 s += sqr(i) next tc = Ge...