D
Dennis Lee Bieber
jrlen said:hi! could anyone give their input on my previous post about timer and
threading...]
pleaseee...
said:1. It's most annoying that you are not taking even a bit
of time to "prune" the useless quoted material from your
messages (notice how I've done it in this one). From
a netiquette point of view, that's considered rude and reduces
the level of respect you will be shown.
I didn't even notice the posts myself, as I've got size filters
in place -- from when we were getting a lot of spam posting of binaries
and HTML; these posts were too large for my filters to let in. (Okay,
they /were/ also sent to my email address; I didn't reply there as the
CC: to the Python list was also visible -- I'd rather have handled the
stuff here)
To add to the pseudo-code (since there isn't enough there to1.6. Always start a new thread when you have a new request.
One reason you might not have got replies to this latest
request yet is that you posted it as a followup to the
More importantly, your code can't be executed, so
we're just shooting in the dark if we try to figure
out how you are getting "someTimerEvent" to execute,
if indeed it is a function. The "def" statements
don't have colons after them, so we're not even sure
you are asking about how to do something, or perhaps
you have code that is just not compiling because it
is syntactically incorrect.
even code a test case, assuming one corrects the : matter), assuming it
is the "regular" timing module, the time /delay/ is NOT an argument of
the start() method, but rather of the instance creation. As I recall,
they are one-shots and not repeating timers. From a quick read, a timer
is, itself, a thread -- at the simplest level then, I would conclude
that a time is nothing more than a thread with the pseudo-code of:
sleep(delay)
eventFunction()
--