assigning to ocean script variable result of c-shell command.

Well, you could use:

id=ipcBeginProcess("date +%s.%N")
ipcWait(id)
dateInfo=ipcReadProcess(id)

I'm not convinced it's worthwhile though, because there's some overhead in launching a child process for communication this way, and I think it would wipe out the extra resolution you're after.

You could potentially run a background "slave" process which sat listening for requests for the time, which responded with the date. That way you could do the ipcBeginProcess() once, and then send a "command" to the child to request the date whenever you wanted the current date, and it would feed it back.

One way to do this would be to use a little C program like this:

 #include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/time.h>

main(argc,argv)
int argc;
char *argv[;
{
    struct timeval time;
    char line[256];

    while(fgets(line,256,stdin)) {
    gettimeofday(&time, NULL);
    fprintf(stdout,"%d.%d\n",time.tv_sec,time.tv_usec);
    fflush(stdout);
    }
}

I compiled this with "cc -o datequery datequery.c" and then use this SKILL:

 procedure(CCSgetDate()
    unless(CCSgetDate.cid && ipcIsAliveProcess(CCSgetDate.cid)
        CCSgetDate.cid=ipcBeginProcess("datequery")
        ipcWaitForProcess(CCSgetDate.cid)
    )
    ipcWriteProcess(CCSgetDate.cid "get\n")
    ipcReadProcess(CCSgetDate.cid 2)
)

and then call CCSgetDate() whenever you want the date (in form seconds.microseconds).

Alternatively, if you're trying to optimize code, you could use the SKILL profiler, or use the cputime() function in SKILL. Depends really what you're trying to achieve.

Regards,

Andrew.

 Thanks for the help!

I did the approach with cc progam and calling it as procedure.

There was one syntaxys error in the C program:

char *argv[;

I repaired it. And now system works perferctly

 Best regards,

tyanata

Hi tyanata,

Something odd must have happened when I posted it, because the syntax is correct in my original code. In fact I just went to edit the earlier post to correct it, and when I hit "Edit" the code is correct... So I don't know why it doesn't have the close square bracket.

Anyway, glad it worked for you.

Regards,

Andrew.