Difference between revisions of "Talk:LlSay"

From Second Life Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 11: Line 11:


::Never been a delay, sorry :-/ '''[[User:Strife_Onizuka|Strife]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Strife_Onizuka|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Strife_Onizuka|contribs]])</small></sup> 04:13, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
::Never been a delay, sorry :-/ '''[[User:Strife_Onizuka|Strife]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Strife_Onizuka|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Strife_Onizuka|contribs]])</small></sup> 04:13, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
== 200/2 sec ? ==
Is that "...will be dropped until the send rate is again below 200/2sec for the previous 2 sec." correct, or is it back to "200/10sec for the previous 2 sec" ? (or ("40/2sec for the previous 2 seonds)[[User:Sigma Avro|Sigma Avro]] 16:20, 22 August 2014 (PDT)
:hmm that is a hard one (I can't think how you would implement that in a meaningful way). I think the explanation is that Maestro's [https://wiki.secondlife.com/w/index.php?title=Template%3ALSL_Function%2Fchat&diff=1175243&oldid=1171952 edit] was incomplete. -- '''[[User:Strife_Onizuka|Strife]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Strife_Onizuka|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Strife_Onizuka|contribs]])</small></sup> 19:21, 22 August 2014 (PDT)

Latest revision as of 18:21, 22 August 2014

Wasn't there a delay for llSay, llShout, and llWhisper? The wiki says theres 0.0 delay for these functions now, and I was certain that there used to be a delay for these! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeffery Beckersted

Doesn't look like. Try

<lsl>default{

   state_entry(){
       integer i;
       for(i = 0; i < 200; i++) llSay(0, "no delay...");
   }

}</lsl>

But only somewhere where no other avas are in a 20m range plz ^^
Greetz, Zai signature.png Lynch (talk|contribs) 01:50, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Never been a delay, sorry :-/ Strife (talk|contribs) 04:13, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

200/2 sec ?

Is that "...will be dropped until the send rate is again below 200/2sec for the previous 2 sec." correct, or is it back to "200/10sec for the previous 2 sec" ? (or ("40/2sec for the previous 2 seonds)Sigma Avro 16:20, 22 August 2014 (PDT)

hmm that is a hard one (I can't think how you would implement that in a meaningful way). I think the explanation is that Maestro's edit was incomplete. -- Strife (talk|contribs) 19:21, 22 August 2014 (PDT)