Message209245
> > Once again, what's wrong with your initial approach of ceiling the
timeout?
>
> It looks like changing the rounding method doesn't solve anything.
> selector.select(timeout) may still take less than timeout, so it
> doesn't give any guarantee.
But what problem does it cause if, once in a while, the call takes less
than the passed timeout?
If that's the case, you'll simply perform another loop, an wake up 1ms
later, that's all.
There's a lot of call written this way, and this has never been a problem:
so far, you still didn't give an example of problematic behavior. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2014-01-25 22:11:54 | neologix | set | recipients:
+ neologix, gvanrossum, georg.brandl, pitrou, vstinner, python-dev, serhiy.storchaka |
2014-01-25 22:11:54 | neologix | link | issue20311 messages |
2014-01-25 22:11:54 | neologix | create | |
|