Charles-François Natali added the comment: > > 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. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue20311> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
