<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 1:58 PM, James Richters <span dir="ltr"><<a target="_blank" href="mailto:james@productionautomation.net">james@productionautomation.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote"><div lang="EN-US"><div><p class="gmail-MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"calibri",sans-serif">I think there may be a solution with this performance counter for my purposes…  here’s what I’m trying to accomplish:</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div>Well, Windows provides a different means of waiting (and waiting with time out) for the Serial port communication.<br><br></div><div>The whole topic is discussed here: <a href="https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff802693.aspx#serial_topic1">https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff802693.aspx#serial_topic1</a><br></div></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I'm thinking that using performance counter is a little of over-engineering <br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">thanks,<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Dmitry<br></div></div>