Message85266
| Author |
rnk |
| Recipients |
giampaolo.rodola, rnk |
| Date |
2009年04月02日.20:48:59 |
| SpamBayes Score |
1.313227e-05 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1238705341.32.0.114796377393.issue5673@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Ugh. I made the assumption that there must be some natural and easy way
to wait for a child process with a timeout in C, and it turns out it's
actually a hard problem, which is why this isn't already implemented.
So my initial hack for solving this problem in my own project was to run
the subprocess, spawn a thread to wait on it, and then use the thread's
wait method, which does accept a timeout. On further inspection, it
turns out that Thread.wait() actually uses a busy loop to implement the
timeout, which is what I was trying to avoid. If it's okay to have a
busy loop there, is it okay to have one in Popen.wait()? Obviously, you
don't need to busy loop if there is no timeout. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2009年04月02日 20:49:01 | rnk | set | recipients:
+ rnk, giampaolo.rodola |
| 2009年04月02日 20:49:01 | rnk | set | messageid: <1238705341.32.0.114796377393.issue5673@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2009年04月02日 20:49:00 | rnk | link | issue5673 messages |
| 2009年04月02日 20:48:59 | rnk | create |
|