Hacker News Reader

For Windows, you can use CreateWaitableTimer to create a timer that doesn't need a window: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/synchapi...

Wait for it to time out using one of the WaitFor family of functions.

View on HN

Alternatively there is everybody's favorite CreateThreadpoolTimer https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/threadpo... now that the threadpool is active on any Win32 process by default AFAIK. But for something you don't mind blocking the above is often easier to use.

Whew, so we've got CreateWaitableTimer, CreateTimerQueueTimer from another comment, and now CreateThreadpoolTimer as well. But that's not all - we already had WM_TIMER from the article.

TFA says POSIX has one type of timer, and it sucks. Windows has 4 types... but how many of them suck? I've used CreateWaitableTimer, and it was alright. I do know WM_TIMER sucks, but I've never used CreateTimerQueueTimer or CreateThreadpoolTimer. So, worst case is a draw. I'd like to see Windows winning here though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com