Steve Dower <steve.do...@python.org> added the comment:
> Maybe it would be useful to implement something like this in time.sleep()
> itself, but I don't know whether the need in a few cases warrants the
> increased complexity and cost in general.
It certainly wouldn't be worth the power and CPU usage impact that people would
inevitable get tricked into causing ("why is Python always using 100% of my
CPU!?").
So as long as I'm around, feel free to consider that idea rejected ;) We'll
improve the resolution of sleep when the operating system does.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue44681>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
