Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #36981 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-07-24 01:21 -0700 |
| Last post | 2019-07-27 07:39 -0700 |
| Articles | 13 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript
How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 01:21 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 01:31 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 01:34 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 01:39 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 01:49 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 01:50 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 01:53 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 01:54 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 01:56 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-07-24 13:46 +0200
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-24 08:06 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-27 07:38 -0700
Re: How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-07-27 07:39 -0700
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 01:21 -0700 |
| Subject | How can i make a timer process "not run in a thread" |
| Message-ID | <cbc9c416-3787-4c40-a779-5ac55bfdf841@googlegroups.com> |
This is a countin before the timer reset and metronome and recording starts.
As you can see i initita the record "and playup" as i have aborted the countin".
I really do not want it that way i want two sequential calls first one to the countin and then one that init play and rec.
I guess that setInterval is the only way to call with intervals, problem for me is it run in a thread so anything i run after setInterval will immediately be executed, if i not start it after i aborted the countIn?
I am totally unfamiliar with threads and this type of problem, so what is the easiest way to get the countin interval and recording interval to be exectuted sequential. countINREC() -> initPlayREC
//COUNTIN RECORDING
function countInREC() {
//Count In metronome
echostate=document.getElementById("echo").checked;
document.getElementById("echo").checked = false;
checkIfEchoMessage();
console.log("recInit activetrack=" + activetrack);
if (document.getElementById("recordmode").value == "REPLACE") {
removeTrackMessages(activetrack);
}
beats = 1;
mode = "Count In";
document.getElementById("status").value = mode;
// listLeftCanvas();
countticks = setInterval(countInTimer, interval);
}
function countInTimer() {
var metvol;
if (met == 1) {
metvol=127;
metcall(metvol);
} else {
metvol=50;
metcall(metvol);
}
if (met == 4) {
met = 0;
}
if (beats == 8) {
abortCountin();
}
met++;
beats++;
}
function abortCountin() {
// Stop countin
clearInterval(countticks);
initPlayREC();
}
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 01:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9ff89f6d-5d3e-4c7b-a66f-48c262e631a6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36981 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> This is a countin before the timer reset and metronome and recording starts.
> As you can see i initita the record "and playup" as i have aborted the countin".
> I really do not want it that way i want two sequential calls first one to the countin and then one that init play and rec.
>
> I guess that setInterval is the only way to call with intervals, problem for me is it run in a thread so anything i run after setInterval will immediately be executed, if i not start it after i aborted the countIn?
>
> I am totally unfamiliar with threads and this type of problem, so what is the easiest way to get the countin interval and recording interval to be exectuted sequential. countINREC() -> initPlayREC
>
>
>
> //COUNTIN RECORDING
> function countInREC() {
> //Count In metronome
> echostate=document.getElementById("echo").checked;
> document.getElementById("echo").checked = false;
> checkIfEchoMessage();
> console.log("recInit activetrack=" + activetrack);
> if (document.getElementById("recordmode").value == "REPLACE") {
> removeTrackMessages(activetrack);
> }
> beats = 1;
> mode = "Count In";
> document.getElementById("status").value = mode;
> // listLeftCanvas();
> countticks = setInterval(countInTimer, interval);
> }
>
> function countInTimer() {
> var metvol;
> if (met == 1) {
> metvol=127;
> metcall(metvol);
> } else {
> metvol=50;
> metcall(metvol);
> }
> if (met == 4) {
> met = 0;
> }
> if (beats == 8) {
> abortCountin();
> }
> met++;
> beats++;
> }
>
> function abortCountin() {
> // Stop countin
> clearInterval(countticks);
> initPlayREC();
> }
I realise i could do something like.
function initREC(){
countIn();
setTimeout(initPlayREC,xxxx);
}
But for me that also just feel weird, i want the execution sequential but how?
}
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 01:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6e9eaf29-f9f8-42d8-8fba-602f69214756@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36982 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:31:30 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > This is a countin before the timer reset and metronome and recording starts.
> > As you can see i initita the record "and playup" as i have aborted the countin".
> > I really do not want it that way i want two sequential calls first one to the countin and then one that init play and rec.
> >
> > I guess that setInterval is the only way to call with intervals, problem for me is it run in a thread so anything i run after setInterval will immediately be executed, if i not start it after i aborted the countIn?
> >
> > I am totally unfamiliar with threads and this type of problem, so what is the easiest way to get the countin interval and recording interval to be exectuted sequential. countINREC() -> initPlayREC
> >
> >
> >
> > //COUNTIN RECORDING
> > function countInREC() {
> > //Count In metronome
> > echostate=document.getElementById("echo").checked;
> > document.getElementById("echo").checked = false;
> > checkIfEchoMessage();
> > console.log("recInit activetrack=" + activetrack);
> > if (document.getElementById("recordmode").value == "REPLACE") {
> > removeTrackMessages(activetrack);
> > }
> > beats = 1;
> > mode = "Count In";
> > document.getElementById("status").value = mode;
> > // listLeftCanvas();
> > countticks = setInterval(countInTimer, interval);
> > }
> >
> > function countInTimer() {
> > var metvol;
> > if (met == 1) {
> > metvol=127;
> > metcall(metvol);
> > } else {
> > metvol=50;
> > metcall(metvol);
> > }
> > if (met == 4) {
> > met = 0;
> > }
> > if (beats == 8) {
> > abortCountin();
> > }
> > met++;
> > beats++;
> > }
> >
> > function abortCountin() {
> > // Stop countin
> > clearInterval(countticks);
> > initPlayREC();
> > }
>
> I realise i could do something like.
> function initREC(){
> countIn();
> setTimeout(initPlayREC,xxxx);
> }
>
> But for me that also just feel weird, i want the execution sequential but how?
>
> }
Well personally i think setTimeout should have a flag for run in thread or single threaded but that is me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 01:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f40864e7-e401-4f32-8bf0-d352d0b0eba9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36983 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:34:10 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:31:30 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > > This is a countin before the timer reset and metronome and recording starts.
> > > As you can see i initita the record "and playup" as i have aborted the countin".
> > > I really do not want it that way i want two sequential calls first one to the countin and then one that init play and rec.
> > >
> > > I guess that setInterval is the only way to call with intervals, problem for me is it run in a thread so anything i run after setInterval will immediately be executed, if i not start it after i aborted the countIn?
> > >
> > > I am totally unfamiliar with threads and this type of problem, so what is the easiest way to get the countin interval and recording interval to be exectuted sequential. countINREC() -> initPlayREC
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > //COUNTIN RECORDING
> > > function countInREC() {
> > > //Count In metronome
> > > echostate=document.getElementById("echo").checked;
> > > document.getElementById("echo").checked = false;
> > > checkIfEchoMessage();
> > > console.log("recInit activetrack=" + activetrack);
> > > if (document.getElementById("recordmode").value == "REPLACE") {
> > > removeTrackMessages(activetrack);
> > > }
> > > beats = 1;
> > > mode = "Count In";
> > > document.getElementById("status").value = mode;
> > > // listLeftCanvas();
> > > countticks = setInterval(countInTimer, interval);
> > > }
> > >
> > > function countInTimer() {
> > > var metvol;
> > > if (met == 1) {
> > > metvol=127;
> > > metcall(metvol);
> > > } else {
> > > metvol=50;
> > > metcall(metvol);
> > > }
> > > if (met == 4) {
> > > met = 0;
> > > }
> > > if (beats == 8) {
> > > abortCountin();
> > > }
> > > met++;
> > > beats++;
> > > }
> > >
> > > function abortCountin() {
> > > // Stop countin
> > > clearInterval(countticks);
> > > initPlayREC();
> > > }
> >
> > I realise i could do something like.
> > function initREC(){
> > countIn();
> > setTimeout(initPlayREC,xxxx);
> > }
> >
> > But for me that also just feel weird, i want the execution sequential but how?
> >
> > }
>
> Well personally i think setTimeout should have a flag for run in thread or single threaded but that is me.
Sorry setInterval
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 01:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5d061dc4-1b31-4fb1-a938-dc7b7415ee31@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36981 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> This is a countin before the timer reset and metronome and recording starts.
> As you can see i initita the record "and playup" as i have aborted the countin".
> I really do not want it that way i want two sequential calls first one to the countin and then one that init play and rec.
>
> I guess that setInterval is the only way to call with intervals, problem for me is it run in a thread so anything i run after setInterval will immediately be executed, if i not start it after i aborted the countIn?
>
> I am totally unfamiliar with threads and this type of problem, so what is the easiest way to get the countin interval and recording interval to be exectuted sequential. countINREC() -> initPlayREC
>
>
>
> //COUNTIN RECORDING
> function countInREC() {
> //Count In metronome
> echostate=document.getElementById("echo").checked;
> document.getElementById("echo").checked = false;
> checkIfEchoMessage();
> console.log("recInit activetrack=" + activetrack);
> if (document.getElementById("recordmode").value == "REPLACE") {
> removeTrackMessages(activetrack);
> }
> beats = 1;
> mode = "Count In";
> document.getElementById("status").value = mode;
> // listLeftCanvas();
> countticks = setInterval(countInTimer, interval);
> }
>
> function countInTimer() {
> var metvol;
> if (met == 1) {
> metvol=127;
> metcall(metvol);
> } else {
> metvol=50;
> metcall(metvol);
> }
> if (met == 4) {
> met = 0;
> }
> if (beats == 8) {
> abortCountin();
> }
> met++;
> beats++;
> }
>
> function abortCountin() {
> // Stop countin
> clearInterval(countticks);
> initPlayREC();
> }
This is the suggested strategies from stackOverFlow but i think it is all just convoluted incoherent idiocies?
function initREC(){
countIn();
setTimeout(initPlayREC,xxxx);
}
The above seem thousand times better then the idiocies they post, how come noone protest when things get idiotic and convoluted. With a threaded flag on setTimeOut this discussion would not even be. Doesn't people notice when something is evidently convoluted in construction?
So why does people write post on howto enable them to run two process intervals sequential, "that is the crux", it does not make sense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 01:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f911b93b-80d8-466b-b77c-cef2e20e6419@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36985 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:49:23 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > This is a countin before the timer reset and metronome and recording starts.
> > As you can see i initita the record "and playup" as i have aborted the countin".
> > I really do not want it that way i want two sequential calls first one to the countin and then one that init play and rec.
> >
> > I guess that setInterval is the only way to call with intervals, problem for me is it run in a thread so anything i run after setInterval will immediately be executed, if i not start it after i aborted the countIn?
> >
> > I am totally unfamiliar with threads and this type of problem, so what is the easiest way to get the countin interval and recording interval to be exectuted sequential. countINREC() -> initPlayREC
> >
> >
> >
> > //COUNTIN RECORDING
> > function countInREC() {
> > //Count In metronome
> > echostate=document.getElementById("echo").checked;
> > document.getElementById("echo").checked = false;
> > checkIfEchoMessage();
> > console.log("recInit activetrack=" + activetrack);
> > if (document.getElementById("recordmode").value == "REPLACE") {
> > removeTrackMessages(activetrack);
> > }
> > beats = 1;
> > mode = "Count In";
> > document.getElementById("status").value = mode;
> > // listLeftCanvas();
> > countticks = setInterval(countInTimer, interval);
> > }
> >
> > function countInTimer() {
> > var metvol;
> > if (met == 1) {
> > metvol=127;
> > metcall(metvol);
> > } else {
> > metvol=50;
> > metcall(metvol);
> > }
> > if (met == 4) {
> > met = 0;
> > }
> > if (beats == 8) {
> > abortCountin();
> > }
> > met++;
> > beats++;
> > }
> >
> > function abortCountin() {
> > // Stop countin
> > clearInterval(countticks);
> > initPlayREC();
> > }
>
> This is the suggested strategies from stackOverFlow but i think it is all just convoluted incoherent idiocies?
>
> function initREC(){
> countIn();
> setTimeout(initPlayREC,xxxx);
> }
>
> The above seem thousand times better then the idiocies they post, how come noone protest when things get idiotic and convoluted. With a threaded flag on setTimeOut this discussion would not even be. Doesn't people notice when something is evidently convoluted in construction?
>
> So why does people write post on howto enable them to run two process intervals sequential, "that is the crux", it does not make sense.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22412545/sequentially-running-multiple-setintervals
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 01:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d561273e-2802-41a1-b8b9-64288b70b029@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36986 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:50:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:49:23 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > > This is a countin before the timer reset and metronome and recording starts.
> > > As you can see i initita the record "and playup" as i have aborted the countin".
> > > I really do not want it that way i want two sequential calls first one to the countin and then one that init play and rec.
> > >
> > > I guess that setInterval is the only way to call with intervals, problem for me is it run in a thread so anything i run after setInterval will immediately be executed, if i not start it after i aborted the countIn?
> > >
> > > I am totally unfamiliar with threads and this type of problem, so what is the easiest way to get the countin interval and recording interval to be exectuted sequential. countINREC() -> initPlayREC
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > //COUNTIN RECORDING
> > > function countInREC() {
> > > //Count In metronome
> > > echostate=document.getElementById("echo").checked;
> > > document.getElementById("echo").checked = false;
> > > checkIfEchoMessage();
> > > console.log("recInit activetrack=" + activetrack);
> > > if (document.getElementById("recordmode").value == "REPLACE") {
> > > removeTrackMessages(activetrack);
> > > }
> > > beats = 1;
> > > mode = "Count In";
> > > document.getElementById("status").value = mode;
> > > // listLeftCanvas();
> > > countticks = setInterval(countInTimer, interval);
> > > }
> > >
> > > function countInTimer() {
> > > var metvol;
> > > if (met == 1) {
> > > metvol=127;
> > > metcall(metvol);
> > > } else {
> > > metvol=50;
> > > metcall(metvol);
> > > }
> > > if (met == 4) {
> > > met = 0;
> > > }
> > > if (beats == 8) {
> > > abortCountin();
> > > }
> > > met++;
> > > beats++;
> > > }
> > >
> > > function abortCountin() {
> > > // Stop countin
> > > clearInterval(countticks);
> > > initPlayREC();
> > > }
> >
> > This is the suggested strategies from stackOverFlow but i think it is all just convoluted incoherent idiocies?
> >
> > function initREC(){
> > countIn();
> > setTimeout(initPlayREC,xxxx);
> > }
> >
> > The above seem thousand times better then the idiocies they post, how come noone protest when things get idiotic and convoluted. With a threaded flag on setTimeOut this discussion would not even be. Doesn't people notice when something is evidently convoluted in construction?
> >
> > So why does people write post on howto enable them to run two process intervals sequential, "that is the crux", it does not make sense.
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22412545/sequentially-running-multiple-setintervals
Javascript is great, but somethings are inherently idiotic simply make no sense, do not anyone notice. How could run two timed processes sequential, be a problem to begin with?????
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 01:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7e7ae267-41ce-4005-afa5-c3a3e70b2bab@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36987 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:53:16 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:50:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:49:23 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > > > This is a countin before the timer reset and metronome and recording starts.
> > > > As you can see i initita the record "and playup" as i have aborted the countin".
> > > > I really do not want it that way i want two sequential calls first one to the countin and then one that init play and rec.
> > > >
> > > > I guess that setInterval is the only way to call with intervals, problem for me is it run in a thread so anything i run after setInterval will immediately be executed, if i not start it after i aborted the countIn?
> > > >
> > > > I am totally unfamiliar with threads and this type of problem, so what is the easiest way to get the countin interval and recording interval to be exectuted sequential. countINREC() -> initPlayREC
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > //COUNTIN RECORDING
> > > > function countInREC() {
> > > > //Count In metronome
> > > > echostate=document.getElementById("echo").checked;
> > > > document.getElementById("echo").checked = false;
> > > > checkIfEchoMessage();
> > > > console.log("recInit activetrack=" + activetrack);
> > > > if (document.getElementById("recordmode").value == "REPLACE") {
> > > > removeTrackMessages(activetrack);
> > > > }
> > > > beats = 1;
> > > > mode = "Count In";
> > > > document.getElementById("status").value = mode;
> > > > // listLeftCanvas();
> > > > countticks = setInterval(countInTimer, interval);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > function countInTimer() {
> > > > var metvol;
> > > > if (met == 1) {
> > > > metvol=127;
> > > > metcall(metvol);
> > > > } else {
> > > > metvol=50;
> > > > metcall(metvol);
> > > > }
> > > > if (met == 4) {
> > > > met = 0;
> > > > }
> > > > if (beats == 8) {
> > > > abortCountin();
> > > > }
> > > > met++;
> > > > beats++;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > function abortCountin() {
> > > > // Stop countin
> > > > clearInterval(countticks);
> > > > initPlayREC();
> > > > }
> > >
> > > This is the suggested strategies from stackOverFlow but i think it is all just convoluted incoherent idiocies?
> > >
> > > function initREC(){
> > > countIn();
> > > setTimeout(initPlayREC,xxxx);
> > > }
> > >
> > > The above seem thousand times better then the idiocies they post, how come noone protest when things get idiotic and convoluted. With a threaded flag on setTimeOut this discussion would not even be. Doesn't people notice when something is evidently convoluted in construction?
> > >
> > > So why does people write post on howto enable them to run two process intervals sequential, "that is the crux", it does not make sense.
> >
> > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22412545/sequentially-running-multiple-setintervals
>
> Javascript is great, but somethings are inherently idiotic simply make no sense, do not anyone notice. How could run two timed processes sequential, be a problem to begin with?????
Ok i am done ranting for today, look forward for the explanations.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 01:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c026d8f3-5e0c-4937-b5d2-05cc1e774437@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36988 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:54:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:53:16 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:50:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:49:23 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > > > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > > > > This is a countin before the timer reset and metronome and recording starts.
> > > > > As you can see i initita the record "and playup" as i have aborted the countin".
> > > > > I really do not want it that way i want two sequential calls first one to the countin and then one that init play and rec.
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess that setInterval is the only way to call with intervals, problem for me is it run in a thread so anything i run after setInterval will immediately be executed, if i not start it after i aborted the countIn?
> > > > >
> > > > > I am totally unfamiliar with threads and this type of problem, so what is the easiest way to get the countin interval and recording interval to be exectuted sequential. countINREC() -> initPlayREC
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > //COUNTIN RECORDING
> > > > > function countInREC() {
> > > > > //Count In metronome
> > > > > echostate=document.getElementById("echo").checked;
> > > > > document.getElementById("echo").checked = false;
> > > > > checkIfEchoMessage();
> > > > > console.log("recInit activetrack=" + activetrack);
> > > > > if (document.getElementById("recordmode").value == "REPLACE") {
> > > > > removeTrackMessages(activetrack);
> > > > > }
> > > > > beats = 1;
> > > > > mode = "Count In";
> > > > > document.getElementById("status").value = mode;
> > > > > // listLeftCanvas();
> > > > > countticks = setInterval(countInTimer, interval);
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > function countInTimer() {
> > > > > var metvol;
> > > > > if (met == 1) {
> > > > > metvol=127;
> > > > > metcall(metvol);
> > > > > } else {
> > > > > metvol=50;
> > > > > metcall(metvol);
> > > > > }
> > > > > if (met == 4) {
> > > > > met = 0;
> > > > > }
> > > > > if (beats == 8) {
> > > > > abortCountin();
> > > > > }
> > > > > met++;
> > > > > beats++;
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > function abortCountin() {
> > > > > // Stop countin
> > > > > clearInterval(countticks);
> > > > > initPlayREC();
> > > > > }
> > > >
> > > > This is the suggested strategies from stackOverFlow but i think it is all just convoluted incoherent idiocies?
> > > >
> > > > function initREC(){
> > > > countIn();
> > > > setTimeout(initPlayREC,xxxx);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > The above seem thousand times better then the idiocies they post, how come noone protest when things get idiotic and convoluted. With a threaded flag on setTimeOut this discussion would not even be. Doesn't people notice when something is evidently convoluted in construction?
> > > >
> > > > So why does people write post on howto enable them to run two process intervals sequential, "that is the crux", it does not make sense.
> > >
> > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22412545/sequentially-running-multiple-setintervals
> >
> > Javascript is great, but somethings are inherently idiotic simply make no sense, do not anyone notice. How could run two timed processes sequential, be a problem to begin with?????
>
> Ok i am done ranting for today, look forward for the explanations.
Meanwhile i use setTimeout and hope the two clocks somewhat in sync, you fucking morons.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 13:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <gpquohF1i7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #36989 |
On 24.07.19 10:56, Jonas Thörnvall wrote: > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:54:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: >> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:53:16 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: >>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:50:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: >>>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:49:23 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: >>>>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: [...] > Meanwhile i use setTimeout and hope the two clocks somewhat in sync, you fucking morons. Whatever your problem is. With this attitude you won't get help from anybody. -- Arno Welzel https://arnowelzel.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-24 08:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6c734f5b-da4f-48d7-a3d0-4a0684ee47d6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36992 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 13:46:32 UTC+2 skrev Arno Welzel: > On 24.07.19 10:56, Jonas Thörnvall wrote: > > > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:54:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > >> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:53:16 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > >>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:50:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > >>>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:49:23 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > >>>>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > [...] > > Meanwhile i use setTimeout and hope the two clocks somewhat in sync, you fucking morons. > > Whatever your problem is. With this attitude you won't get help from > anybody. > > > -- > Arno Welzel > https://arnowelzel.de I already know i just complaining. It is poor mans help LoL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-27 07:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0c77ffb5-6b4a-47ce-909f-754b77385f23@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36992 |
Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 13:46:32 UTC+2 skrev Arno Welzel: > On 24.07.19 10:56, Jonas Thörnvall wrote: > > > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:54:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > >> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:53:16 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > >>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:50:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > >>>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:49:23 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > >>>>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > [...] > > Meanwhile i use setTimeout and hope the two clocks somewhat in sync, you fucking morons. > > Whatever your problem is. With this attitude you won't get help from > anybody. > > > -- > Arno Welzel > https://arnowelzel.de I must fix so the playup in synch, but fixing the downmix to playup in synch is tiresome.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-27 07:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e9295aef-5d93-4e0b-a518-43760f7f9fe9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #37000 |
Den lördag 27 juli 2019 kl. 16:38:12 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 13:46:32 UTC+2 skrev Arno Welzel: > > On 24.07.19 10:56, Jonas Thörnvall wrote: > > > > > Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:54:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > > >> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:53:16 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > > >>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:50:07 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > > >>>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:49:23 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > > >>>>> Den onsdag 24 juli 2019 kl. 10:21:51 UTC+2 skrev Jonas Thörnvall: > > [...] > > > Meanwhile i use setTimeout and hope the two clocks somewhat in sync, you fucking morons. > > > > Whatever your problem is. With this attitude you won't get help from > > anybody. > > > > > > -- > > Arno Welzel > > https://arnowelzel.de > > I must fix so the playup in synch, but fixing the downmix to playup in synch is tiresome https://midisequenser.000webhostapp.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript
csiph-web